Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Franklin Knight Lane/archive2

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 Karanacs 14:55, 5 May 2009 [1].

Franklin Knight Lane

[edit]
Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because... I believe it meets FA criteria. Second time through for Lane, first time it had one support, no opposes when it aged out of the system. I've now taken it through GA, though the reviewer had no recommended changes, gone through the article with a fine tooth comb, and restructured it a fair amount. I think this interesting and too often overlooked character from American history is now ready to join the ranks of the immortals at WP:FA.Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tech. Review
Dab fixed. Not sure what you are referring to with the self-redirect, can you point me in the right direction? I changed the Wikisource to Franklin Knight Lane from Franklin Lane, was that what you were talking about?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing so, since the dab finder tool can't pick it up anymore.--Truco 00:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably that is what it was. Anyway, I guess your issues are resolved then. Thanks!--Wehwalt (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review
  • File:Lane1902.jpg - Please add a page number to the reference on the image description page so that users can find the photo in the book.
  • File:Laneposter.jpg - Please add a page number to the reference on the image description page so that users can find the photo in the book.
  • File:Lane1909.jpg - The link to the LOC is broken. Please fix it.
  • File:Laneburleson.jpg - As this image is actually from the LOC and not Flickr, it would probably be best to find it there and link directly to the LOC record.

These issues should be easy to resolve. Awadewit (talk) 19:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the page numbers, done a LOC source for Laneburleson, and added a URL for Lane1909 which seems to work, though it is a very long URL. I'm not sure it is the best URL for it. Thoughts? I'm not experienced in working with their collections and may have screwed up.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has all been taken care of. Image issues all resolved. Awadewit (talk) 22:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help there.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

images I am not happy with the licencing, they are listed as free in the US only (with one exception), the goal of wp is worldwide these should be relicenced as free everywhere is possible Fasach Nua (talk) 20:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you do that?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you can demonstrate they are free in their country of origin, they are generally free everywhere, if can do this tag them as {{PD}} and get them uploaded to commons using {{Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} Fasach Nua (talk) 21:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't be a problem. Lane, after all, died in 1921. I'll work on this when I can and will drop you a note on your talk page.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the images to commons using a bot. A couple were already there.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • Support
  • In the "Commission work" section, I would try to summarise the result of the oil pipeline investigation, and avoid calling Lane "The Californian" as this creates difficulties if the reader considers him Canadian.
  • Both "nonpartisan" and "Non-Partisan" are used.
  • Sandy doesn't like it when the dates are different formats. In this case, the retrieval dates are ISO format but everything else is MDY. DrKiernan (talk) 12:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the support. Non-Partisan had a specific meaning in California politics at the time, please see also the election poster, the other usage is as a common noun (the explanation of why Lane did not campaign for Wilson). It was an additional ticket that cut across partisan lines. The rest is all done.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I brought this up last time: with respect to the remark about Lane's potential as POTUS, the sources are POV and unverified. They originate with the dept. that Lane headed... The one that Wehwalt referred to as written by a "historian" is hagiographic. It now points to a newspaper, but does the newspaper have a verified source, or is it repeating hagiography? Certainly the part about Lane's presidential potential needs to be deleted. Ling.Nut.Public (talk) 09:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, they did not originate with the Department of the Interior, not sure how you are getting that. Two contemporaneous newspapers said it, plus Villard. And the newspapers the day after Lane's death. I don't think that is repeating hagiography. Do you want the exact quotes of what the papers said? Or would you prefer language such as "Contemporary sources reported that it Lane had not been born in Canada, he would have become President"--Wehwalt (talk) 11:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
have you taken the time to read the Villard source? I don't mean the sentence that the quote is taken from; I mean as much as you can find on the Internet. :-) It's an embarrassing foray into pure POV, and should be completely removed as a source.. Ling.Nut.Public (talk) 11:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'm unable to access the newspaper link (pdf). Is it subscription-based, or is the URL incorrect...? Ling.Nut.Public (talk) 12:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I've read it. Then I had to have myself checked for diabetes. That is why the info is inline cited to Villard. The newspaper is subscription, you have to buy an article pack. The quote in the LA Times article is "It was often said of Franklin K. Lane that if he had been born in the United States instead of Canada, he would have been presidential timber." The NY Times said, "Friends of Franklin D. (sic) Lane said that if he had been been born three years later (sic, actually seven) he would have become President of the United States. They meant that he was three years old when his mother and father moved from Canada to California ..." The Washington Post: "Mr. Lane was a native of Prince Edward Island. If he had been born in the United States, he probably would have been nominated for the Presidency by the Democratic Party, and if nominated, he probably would have been elected." If you like, I can do it as a direct quote from the newspaper, and note that Villard was a great admirer of Lane's.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent). Good. To be honest, I think the newspapers are just repeating fluff that Lane's bestest buddies said about him. They saw no harm, I assume, in speaking well of the man.. these were all obits, am I right? They saw no harm in speaking well of the man after he had passed away. The problem is that in the retelling, Wikipedia takes this kindhearted repetition of friends' high praise and transforms it into verifiable fact. For example, the current wording "It was often said of Lane" leaves open the question, "Said by whom, and how often is often?" So this observation needs to be dealt with in two ways: first, it should be to be attributed to the newspapers—not to Villard and not to the National Park Service (http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/sontag/lane.htm). Both of those latter two sources need to be removed from the article, IMO, as being too POV. Second, the quote about "Lane could have been POTUS" needs to be hedged in some way... I dunno, just off the top of my head (please do improve it), "After Lane's death, obituaries published in newspapers of record such as WAPO and NYT suggested that he might have been the Democratic party's nominee for POTUS, if he had been born in the US". Then cite at least WAPO and NYT and even LATimes if you're feeling energetic. :-) Sound fair? Again, I assume those were obits. Ling.Nut.Public (talk) 05:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will put that in. If the article is otherwise satisfactory, I hope you will support.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I meant to support this one last time through, but missed the opportunity due to an unexpected break. The prose seems tight, references check out, and the article generally seems to meet the criteria. From a technical/semantics/nitpicky standpoint, I noticed the dates in the {{persondata}} template at the bottom are Day Month Year while the rest of the article is Month Day Year. Not sure if that's supposed to be like that for standardization reasons for if it should match the rest of the article, but that's the only item that stuck out. --auburnpilot talk 16:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've always seen the persondata done in that way, regardless of nationality. And though Lane was born on PEI, he spent most of his life in the US, so I do Month day year. Thanks for the support.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "On July 1, 1911, the Commission ordered a "sweeping investigation" into the activities of express companies, which transported and delivered parcels." What commission this is referring to is ambigious, as the section as a whole deals with Lane's work on the Interstate Commerce Commission, but the sentence immediately preceding this one mentions his election to the International Railways Congress's Permanent International Commission. Otherwise, the article looks good to me--Carabinieri (talk) 20:07, 22 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks, I changed "Commission" to ICC. Hope you will support.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments After further review, I have changed my Weak Oppose to Oppose. You suffer the same problems that I do as a thorough researcher of uncommonly researched subject matter. You will need a quality writer to clean up your prose to achieve the current FA standard in my opinion. I sympathize and wish you well in getting some better writers interested in the subject. I am not a good enough writer to really clean it up for you. I am willing to continue my slow review and to help you at WP:PR should it not pass. I will not be a sufficient reviewer to bring it up to what I believe is par myself.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

  • He attended Berkeley for two years and then you refer to it as his alma mater. Did he ever graduate?
  • Avoid consecutive In YYYY constructions in "In late 1894, Lane moved back to California, and began to practice law in San Francisco. In 1897–98"
  • in a year which otherwise saw s/b in a year that otherwise saw, I believe.
  • The railroads, which were loosely... probably should be the The railroad companies, which were loosely or The railroad operations, which were loosely or some such. The railroads don't actually control anything.
  • "Roosevelt forgot his promise and instead named Senator Francis Cockrell of Missouri, who was retiring from the Senate after five terms." could be cleaner as "Roosevelt instead named retiring five-term Senator Francis Cockrell of Missouri."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've made those changes. Nice catch; he did not in fact graduate, though it took a very careful reading of the bio information to find that one. Albright actually says that, but I had disregarded it, because he isn't really writing about Lane and he didn't like Lane. However, he's right. Looking forward to more, though I won't be on much until late tomorrow, probably.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • These two sentences don't go together: "Railroad companies were accused of failing to send cars with coal there because the cars could then be used to transport grain to Great Lakes ports. It was alleged the companies were waiting for the lakes to freeze over, necessitating longer rail journeys to market." It seems to me that the first sentence says the companies were sending the cars for use in grain transport and the second says they were delaying doing so. Also the first is not realy quality prose. After the because it is not gramatically clean, IMO. Try something like "Railroad companies were accused of failing to send cars with coal there in order that the cars could be available to transport grain to Great Lakes ports." Then, I don't know what to about the second sentence until you clarify it.
  • Shortage and shortfall are not synonyms.
  • "In October, Lane determined that the Southern Pacific Railroad, one of Harriman's lines, was engaged in rebating, effectively giving special rates to favored shippers, a practice outlawed by the Hepburn Act." is another sloppy construction. I would try "In October, Lane determined that the Southern Pacific Railroad, one of Harriman's lines, was engaged in rebating, a practice of effectively giving special rates to favored shippers that is outlawed by the Hepburn Act."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm sorry you switched to oppose and hope you will continue to work here to address your concerns. I don't consider "I don't like the prose" actionable, since I could bring in another editor and you could still not like the prose. The prose has been gone through during the article's two FACs. I'll try to address your specific points, I don't see what else I can do.
    • I don't see how the railroad car thing is unclear. The practice was to send the cars in the late fall to North Dakota loaded with coal; when they were unloaded, the cars were filled with grain. Your sentence I think would be less clear. I have made a change to the section which I think spells it out more clearly. The others are fine, though I would say "was outlawed by the Hepburn Act" because I have no idea of the present status of the Hepburn Act. I look forward to addressing specific concerns.I hope that after your concerns are addressed, that you will not feel so painted in a corner by your previous comments that you will be able to support, or at least withdraw your oppose.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • We need to do something with this sentence:"According to House in his diaries, Lane, while reluctant to leave his position as chairman, was willing to serve in the Interior position, which he considered the most difficult Cabinet post, if offered or in any other capacity." How about "According to House's diaries, Lane, while reluctant to leave his position as chairman, was willing to serve in the Interior position if offered. He considered the position the most difficult Cabinet post but was also willing to serve in any other capacity."
Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • shifted -> evolved.
  • make "Lane was considered by the President-elect and Colonel House" active voice.
The previous two were taken care of by a rephrase of the sentence to active voice, using the word "adjusted". Wilson had problems putting together his cabinet, mostly his own fault in my view, a combination of indecision, overreliance on House, and kowtowing to bigwigs like William Jennings Bryan. It explains why he didn't write to Lane until eight days before the Inauguration, at which, by the way, Aretha Franklin had no role.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's done.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that article mentions a 1908 event. I've piped to Conference of Governors (1913). I don't know if it evolved into the present day governors' gathering or what.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it worth linking to a redlink. I think I had the Council of Governors mixed up with the National Governors Association.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redlink encourages people to write articles. I don't mind either way.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Taken care of on all counts.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you disagree with linking convoy?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, sorry! I think I've taken care of your specific concerns.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done that.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I realize that this article has been on a long time, but I would ask the FAC delegate to wait and see if Tony switches his vote. If he does, it will have three supports and no opposes. If not ... but give him that chance.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support with a few comments:-

  • Would it possible, instead of always saying he was born in "what is now Canada", to include the information that he was born in what was then a British colony?
I don't always say that, if you look at Early Life, we refer to Reverend Lane disliking the island colony's cold climate. I felt there was a fine line between being accurate and being pedantic when it came to PEI's status. However, I've thrown in a mention when we initially mention PEI.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any information about when he became an American citizen?
No, blast it all, and I really wanted that info because of the great pride he had in being an American. No article I've been able to find has mentioned that. I imagine that his parents were the ones who were naturalized at some point, and the kids became American thereby, but I can't confirm that. I also would have loved some info on how the Lanes got to California. I'd bet a Canadian dollar that it was via the transcontinental railroad, but I can't confirm that either.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead says he became an editor of a newspaper. Text suggests that he was the editor (papers generally only have one)
Othere than wikinews, that's true. Changed.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead statement that Lane's record on conservation was mixed is your own summary and therefore POV
Good point. I've kept the contrast but avoided the POV.
  • Can "Committee of One Hundred" (in Early life section) be briefly explained?
It was a group organized to rewrite the city charter. I've added a few words to make that a bit more clear. I haven't researched this extensively, but from what I understand, San Francisco City had expanded to be coterminous with San Francisco County, and they were reorganizing the government to eliminate duplicate services, and what is important to Lane is that there would no longer be seperate County and City Attorneys, but one man holding the combined position (one salary, I'd assume, not a Pooh-Bah situation). Wish today's politicians were as considerate.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Selection by Wilson section it might be as well to say that Lane said he was happy in his present post.
OK. Not a problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise a clear account of an honourable career almost lost from sight. Question: did Lane always look about 20 years older than he was? See 1898 poster showing him at 34. Brianboulton (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • True. Walter Page mentions in Part I of his series of articles on Lane that Lane appeared middle aged from a young age, but then did not age other than losing what was left of his hair in his final years. Lane's life was honorable indeed. He was very well regarded. Contemporary accounts said that Lane and his contributions to the US would never be forgotten. Of course, today he virtually is, except for a cruddy inner-city high school (though certainly with a beautiful building), a mention by Nabakov, who was impressed by the letter Lane wrote after having that heart surgery (at which I shudder every time I think about it, imagine having heart surgery awake!), and because of Hetch Hetchy. He deserves better. Thanks for the support and the comments.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy with these responses. Brianboulton (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great. By my count, there are three supports, no opposes, one neutral in which Tony indicates that if he had to fish or cut bait, he'd be minded to support, and a fair number of comments. It's passed its technical and image checks. It's now the second most senior article at FAC. Looks pretty good right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Franklin_Knight_Lane/archive2&oldid=1138461084"