Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Huey Long/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 Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 18 April 2021 [1].

Huey Long

[edit]
Nominator(s): ~ HAL333 21:14, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Huey Long, the governor of Louisiana and a US Senator. A proponent of radical solutions to end the Great Depression, he was assassinated in 1935. After prose and length issues were raised in the last nomination, I split off or removed much of the content and put in a GoCE request. ~ HAL333 21:14, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ovinus

[edit]

I'll take this one on. The article is definitely more manageable than it was for the previous nomination. I do think the lead section is still a bit long. Ovinus (talk) 21:58, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should File:Round_Robin_image.jpg be PD-US-expired? Ovinus (talk) 23:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure. Image copyright is my weak point. ~ HAL333 00:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Missed this, it's not a US image so PD-old-100 should do it. (t · c) buidhe 00:21, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the topic, so I can only comment on prose and summary style, not comprehensiveness, et cetera.

  • Love the opening paragraph and lead in general! Efficient and communicative.
  • Poised for a 1936 presidential bid, a lone assassin mortally wounded Long in 1935. Literally, means the assassin was gonna run for president, so how about Poised for a 1936 presidential bid, Long was killed by a lone assassin in 1935. (I'm not sure if "mortally wounded" is needed over "killed", unless you want to make clear it was a shooting, in which case you can do "was shot and killed". But that's not a big deal)
  • ("shortening") Why in quotes here? Probably should do (a brand of shortening)
  • Early life section is great, especially the last quote. :P

Will get to more later! Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 02:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The shortening clarification should be added back; I had no clue what Cottolene was, nor its relation to baking
  • In 1918, Long invested $1,050 Could we add {{Inflation}} ?
  • In the Democratic primary Primary for the railroad commission? Does this mean there was only one seat up for grabs? Some clarification would be appreciated
At the time, Democratic primaries were the de-facto elections. A win against the Republicans in the general was guaranteed. I'm pretty sure the primary was just for one seat, but I unfortunately don't possess White's book anymore... ~ HAL333 18:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see, alright.
  • Cite #33 seems to be a dead link? Also wanted to check that the "most brilliant lawyer" quote does include the full name "United States Supreme Court"
  • states: it had "it" should be capitalized since it's the start of a complete sentence
  • He launched his formal campaign in 1927 Can we make clear that he's running for the same race? For example, He formally launched his second campaign for governor in 1927
  • a phrase adopted from Democratic presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan Maybe a footnote here stating what Bryan's slogan was? On second consideration, I don't think this is necessary
  • Footnote #3 had me laughing out loud
Long was quite the character. It's a shame that I couldn't wedge the other ridiculous anecdotes (ranging from his greeting of the German ambassador while in pajamas or being assaulted after urinating on a man) in this article. ~ HAL333 04:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's just glorious.
  • It has been alleged By whom? (If known)
Unfortunately, I don't have those books anymore... ~ HAL333 19:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Ovinus (talk) 12:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The charges were Could we clarify saying these were the charges he was ultimately impeached on? You could just say "The eight charges"
It's included in note 6. ~ HAL333 04:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's what I meant; to put "The eight charges were: ..." in note 6. It's just that the note is rather long, so my instinct was to expect all nineteen charges. Ovinus (talk) 04:15, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that makes sense. I'll get at it. ~ HAL333 04:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indy beetle, if you still have Harris' book, would it be possible to add the 11 other charges to note 6. No worries if you can't or don't have the time/energy. Thanks! ~ HAL333 19:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see if I can find them. Some of the charges (like supposedly ordering a hit on a state rep) were absolutely spurious, which is why I listed out only the ones on which Long was convicted. -Indy beetle (talk) 19:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Imho, the full list of charges isn't so pertinent. Maybe we can keep the remaining 11 charges very concise and nonspecific; the note is already rather plump. Ovinus (talk) 13:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not having any luck accessing the book. Though if you'd like to, it does list all of the charges there. If they were incorporated I'd also agree to be brief, many of the additional charges were meritless - Harris actually makes the distinction that some of the misappropriation charges that Long was charged with were actually those with the most merit. -Indy beetle (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ye. If anything we could say what you just said, Indy: "Harris notes that some of the remaining 11 charges were absolutely spurious/patently false, and that Long was charged on accusations with the most merit." Ovinus (talk) 14:15, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Curious editor comment: is there a particular reason you use {{sfn}} for only some refs and not others?
Indy Beetle, who reviewed this at the GAN level and has helped fill in some of my blind spots, added those. I just removed them. ~ HAL333 18:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At 72 years old, Ransdell had been in the Senate since Long was age four.
I'm missing something here. ~ HAL333 04:15, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point!! In all seriousness, no clue what I was thinking here; totally fine
  • in which cotton production would be banned Just wanted you to check; I tried to make clear the holiday applies to the whole year.
Looks good to me. ~ HAL333 04:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • which at 450 feet (140 m) tall is the tallest capitol, state or federal, in the United States I kind of like "remains" instead of "is" here
  • Long's night schools Link night school?
  • His provision of free textbooks resulted in a 20 percent increase in school enrollment. How do we know this causal relationship is true?
That's T. Harry Williams for you. Should I keep it, attribute it to Williams, or change it to something more neutral and hedged? ~ HAL333 01:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... up to you, but I'd say it's just uncontentious enough to not require attribution. I guess it depends on whether Williams' work is completely hagiographic or just rather biased. Edit: As a sort of compromise you could probably say "contributed to" instead of "resulted in". The meaning is very similar but less absolute. Ovinus (talk) 13:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Franklin Delano Roosevelt I think a middle initial "D." is sufficient
  • who later claimed he was I'd prefer "said" here since it isn't a contentious claim; it's a purely subjective thing
  • Though he had no constitutional authority, Long continued to draft and press bills through the This confused me. Is Long violating the constitution here? Or is he just skirting around it as a technicality?
Basically just skirting. He wasn't violating anything, but the Constitution obviously never explicitly said that one of its Senators should serve as de-facto governor. ~ HAL333 00:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, nothing needs to be changed Ovinus (talk) 13:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • live ammunition were fired Can "live" can be removed? I'm not familiar with firearm terminology Never mind, realized that "blank ammunition" is a thing
  • In summer 1935, Long called two special legislative sessions could we tack on "in Louisiana" ? Just to keep track, since he is still US Senator. Also nice because you refer to "the state" later in the paragraph
  • State Board of Censors What is this? Never mind, I thought it was some weird dysphemism. That's pretty crazy
  • widow, Rose Long Wikilink Rose Long?
She is already linked in a prior section. I also realized that Russell was linked twice (now removed). ~ HAL333 00:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks Ovinus (talk) 13:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A little confused about the true title of "The Great State – I" citation
Very strange. I have no idea. ~ HAL333 00:21, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I don't have access to their complete archive and there's no point paying $12 for a title. Quickly emailed them though. Ovinus (talk) 13:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree. I once asked Vanity Fair if I could use a caricature of Long and Mussolini: they told it me it would cost a few hundred. Figure I'll just wait until 2030 when it's in the PD. ~ HAL333 18:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I hope you've set your alarm then. Ovinus (talk) 12:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • won the National Book Award in 1983 for Voices of Protest Could we clarify inline what type of book it is?

That's it for now! I might read Long's American National Biography entry just to see if there's any particularly salient info I'd want us to include. I must say, one of the best Wikipedia articles I've ever completely read through—certainly the best biography. It really captures (what I imagine to be) Long's voice and personality, while remaining neutral and Wikipedia-like. Thank you for your hard work! Sincerely, Ovinus (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh also, could we mention the "The Kingfish" nickname somewhere in the body? Its origins and such? Ovinus (talk) 04:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Any updates on this point? Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 12:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. ~ HAL333 18:45, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on comprehensiveness
[edit]

I read the American National Biography Online article on Long by Alan Brinkley—for those reading along, also the author of Voices of Protest. Some things it included:

  • "Long himself seems never to have decided to be a candidate for president that year, but he clearly intended to support a third-party challenge... To that end, he began a modest public flirtation with other national dissident leaders such as Father Charles Coughlin and Dr. Francis Townsend, perhaps as a prelude to an election-year alliance." Do you think his relationship with Coughlin and Townsend is worth a mention? In any case, I think it's important to note in Presidential ambitions that, although he gave conflicting public opinions regarding whether he'd be president, Long in any case wanted a third party?
I added a note about Coughlin and Long: Brinkley actually gives little credence to a joint campaign in Voices of Protest. There is little concrete evidence about Long's plans for 1936 - at one point he even explicitly shot down a third party run. Given that, I tried to avoid stating in wiki voice about what Long would have done and instead just discuss speculation of others. ~ HAL333 20:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good Ovinus (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Exactly how much financial corruption there was in the Long organization is difficult to determine, but it was substantial." You note that "some of his lieutenants were charged with income tax evasion", but it wasn't so explicit. Is this just Brinkley's opinion or is it borne out by your sources? Food for thought, anyway
Yeah, Brinkley tends to be very critical of Long; on the opposite side of the spectrum, T. Harry William's Pulitzer Prize winner is almost doting. The fact that the IRS couldn't find anything says a lot imo. However, I do touch on some of his corrupt behavior with an oil company, and I'll dive back into my sources and see if I can find more information about his financial corruption. ~ HAL333 00:36, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thx! And yeah, he does seem pretty harsh. Ovinus (talk) 13:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Went back through Voices of Protest. Brinkley doesn't really elucidate any corruption. ~ HAL333 19:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Got it Ovinus (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Brinkley states: "After Long’s death, his frail national movement quickly evaporated, and his Louisiana organization soon made its peace with the Roosevelt administration". You state that "Long's policies continued to be enacted in Louisiana by his political machine ... until the election of 1960". We should probably note that his national movement died quickly? Also, the second part of Brinkley's statement seems to contradict yours?
I note in the lede that Although Long's movement faded.... On the second bit, The Long machine continued to exist in Louisiana and execute state-policies, but didn't interfere with Roosevelt or the New Deal. ~ HAL333 19:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I see what you mean. Shouldn't we include that info in the body though? (that he no longer interfered with national policy)
Done. ~ HAL333 18:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also read "The Big Sleazy" from The New Yorker, which I should note is used as a source in the article. So after all my comments are addressed I'm ready to weakly support on comprehensiveness—weakly, because I'm not sure what confidence and degree of familiarity is expected from such a support. Perhaps someone can explain that. Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 10:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation formatting
[edit]
  • All harv-like citations use the same formatting of linking to the book and adding a page number, looks good
  • Cite 116 can also include the location of publication, Baton Rouge
  • Cite 131 was missing some info, so I replaced with {{cite book}}
  • Ref containing Thomas Andrae,"The Legacy of Al Taliaferro," in Disney's Four Color Adventures vol. 1 (2011). needs formatting and more information
I've hidden the material for now. I'll try to get my hands on the book. ~ HAL333 18:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As above, the title of "The Great State – I" is rather unclear. I'm guessing it's The Great State Waiting for the Imam, so maybe just put that. Not a big deal though.
Done. ~ HAL333 18:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite 33 should be Comberland [sic], which I did
  • With regards to Cite 33, should it be attributed to Cornell or to the Supreme Court? (not sure)
I lean Cornell - publisher rather than author. I might be wrong though... ~ HAL333 18:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Ovinus (talk) 20:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite 78 needs an author
  • Cite 94 should remove "The"
I'm confused. Which "The"? ~ HAL333 18:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did it myself, just wanted consistency with the other citation to the U.S. Senate.
Linked NYT in refs. ~ HAL333 18:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Sounds good, I was just curious whether that was an FAC requirement but I've harmonized the rest of them. Ovinus (talk) 20:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose/organization, comprehensiveness, and consistent citation style. The article seems relatively stable so I don't think I'll have to reassess. Great work. Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 20:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the thorough review. :) ~ HAL333 22:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass

[edit]
Louisiana State Capitol Building
  • File:Huey Long as a child.jpg No indication of publication before 1926 as claimed
  • File:Huey Long traveling salesman.jpg Ditto
Should I just remove these or is there some way to make them fair use?
Probably not since NFCC#8 is unlikely to be met here. (t · c) buidhe 00:21, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:BatonRougeNewCapitolNight1932.jpg Too low contrast. Many modern color photographs exist and would be higher encyclopedic value here.
Could I keep this one? I like that it is a contemporary photograph and I find the reflections on the pond to be quite attractive. Most of the modern color images also include Long's grave and statue, which I think would be better to reveal in the Assassination section.
I think accessibility is a consideration here as not all readers have equal vision ability. The image at right is a featured picture, has better contrast, and would provide greater encyclopedic value by showing colors. The underlying structure doesn't seem to have been altered significantly in the interim, and I don't see Long's statue there unless I'm missing something. (t · c) buidhe 00:21, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Huey Long speaking.png You can get a higher resolution version at the source
I just tried doing it, bit it says it can't be overwritten?...
It's not necessary for FAC but you're right, it would need to be uploaded as a separate file since the format is different. I think there are Commons tools that would transfer the files directly from Library of Commons website but IDK how to use them. (t · c) buidhe 00:21, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I ended up just uploading another one. ~ HAL333 00:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Removed File:Paraguayos en alihuatá.jpg

Comments by Wehwalt

[edit]
I've made hands-on edits, feel free to revert what you don't like.
They all look like improvements to me. ~ HAL333 19:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mention Standard Oil in the lede (and in the body). The links are to a corporation that was broken up after 1911.
This is something that has always bugged me. The sources and Long himself always called it simply "Standard Oil". I assume he was sometimes talking about Standard Oil of Louisiana, a subsidiary of what is now Exxon. But RS never name it as that and (from my reading) Long never distinguished between any of the companies. I guess it was an easier target than listing a dozen different companies. It is similar to the way certain politicians complain about Google when Alphabet may be more relevant. I don't really know what to do here. I feel like the current link is more helpful to the reader than the sparse Standard Oil of Louisiana. ~ HAL333 19:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Noticed this too. None of the sources state that Long attacked Standard Oil's descendants? Wish I could do more research here, but this article cites the company of New Jersey specifically, and this article notes that Standard Oil of New Jersey operated a lot of stuff in his home state. Ovinus (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Around this time, Long evaded fighting in World War I, claiming, "I was not mad at anybody over there," ..." I would cut "Around this time" since we know when the US was in the war.
  • "and alleged he had made corrupt dealings with a Texan oil company." You can make corrupt deals or have corrupt dealings, I'm not sure you can make corrupt dealings.
  • It might be worth noting that, as a practical matter, Long's delay in taking his Senate seat meant he missed only a few weeks of the Senate as (pre-20th Amendment) it did not convene until December of 1931.
I just looked through the book I have on hand but it didn't mention that. I found some sources to support it, but without mentioning Long I worry that it might be a little too close to synthesis. ~ HAL333 20:10, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:55, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Long was unique among southern populists in that he achieved tangible progress. " This seems a very broad statement. Say what you will about someone like Benjamin Tillman, he got his colleges founded.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Senate registrar" Are you sure on the title of this officer? Never heard of them.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "despite an overwhelming Democratic majority" Not until March 4, 1933. Until then, the Democrats did not have a majority.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Roosevelt's son" He had more than one, all notable.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Philippines ... United States had occupied since 1899" while the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1899, the military occupation had begun in 1898, right?
  • "1936 presidential bid against incumbent Franklin D. Roosevelt.[177][21]" Do you mean to have the ref numbers out of order?
  • "Long biographers T. Harry Williams and William Ivy Hair and President Roosevelt, speculated that Long expected to lose in 1936," The ands lead to awkward phrasing.
  • "organizing themselves in militant companies " do you mean militia, not militant?
  • "Father Coughlin, Reno, Townsend," Links would be good. I know Coughlin is linked in a footnote, but the reader may not get there.
  • "Long was the namesake of Huey P. Newton, co-founder of the Black Panther Party.[214][215]" Wasn't Newton Long's namesake, not the other way around?
  • "she often voted against her senior Arkansas Senator Robinson." perhaps ... Arkansas's senior senator, Robinson or ... her senior colleague from Arkansas, Robinson.
That's it. Most interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the comments. ~ HAL333 14:05, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:05, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and support from Gerda

[edit]

You got me interested, I will look, skip the lead for now - will look at that last - and comment as I read. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • I find it a bit repetitive to have the same image in the infobox and the sidebar.
Changed. ~ HAL333 00:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TOC

  • English is not my native language, and politics stranger still. What is Historical reputation (vs. reputation)?
The inclusion of "historical" clarifies that it is retrospective and that it is the view held by historians/academics. I was inspired by what other editors did at the GA Franklin D. Roosevelt. ~ HAL333 00:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Childhood

  • I find it a bit strange in chronology that Long embraced populist sentiments before he went to school ;)
I understand your point, but young children (under 11 in this instance) can still be heavily influenced by the political climate. ~ HAL333
"influenced", yes, but "he embraced" without any time? - We know nothing about him yet, - perhaps describe the political background without (yet) also his activity? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • antics in this context?
The secret society and ribbons. ~ HAL333 00:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we avoid the repetition of high school?
Done. ~ HAL333 00:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I got to the beginning of Senat without problems, and need a break. Impressed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

Reputation

  • "His platform has been compared to everything from European Fascism, Stalinism, to the later McCarthyism." - I think "everything" is saying a bit too much/general. And where does Stalinism sit on the way from Fascism to McCathyism? - Perhaps rephrase completely. Or, if from a quote, perhaps quote? Or ignore me ;)
Rephrased. ~ HAL333 22:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Media

See also

That's it. The sources look impressive and well formatted, but I'm not familiar with the field, so can't say much more. I'm ready to support, because none of the minor points is in the way of this being a features article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda! ~ HAL333 22:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Aza24

[edit]

Just thought I'd reaffirm my support—I supported at the last FAC per my comments and review at PR. A first-class article that surely belong among our pantheon of FAs. Aza24 (talk) 01:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words, Aza. ~ HAL333 02:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pass

[edit]

Doing soon. Aza24 (talk) 01:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

Works cited

  • For sources by the same author (e.g. the three Haas refs), is there a rationale to their order? I would think ordering by year makes sense
Nice catch. Fixed. ~ HAL333 15:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The retrieval dates in Kurtz and Lowe seem out of place, as you're not including them for other books, I suggest removing
Done.
  • Pelican Publishing vs Pelican Publishing Company inconsistency
Done.
  • I'm taking your linking approach as only for the first mention of a publisher, this would mean Random House,
Linked.

References and citations

  • assuming ref 9 should be 122–123 not 122–23, based on how you treat other citations
  • American Heritage should be linked in ref 20 since you've been linking the New Yorker and NYT every time
  • Other missing links include Legal Information Institute, National Park Service, Reveille, Viking Press, The Guilford Press, Kirkus Reviews, WGNO ABC and (maybe) Department of the Treasury
  • You've linked Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association in 3 of the 4 refs, and none of the works cited, I suggest linking every time, to stay consistent with how you're treating NYT and New Yorker
  • New York vs New York City inconsistency between refs and works cited
  • Ref 59 should be p.
  • Refs 85, 144, 209 should be pp.
  • Rolling Stone should have a location—I'm assuming, based on your inclusion of locations for other news refs? Aza24 (talk) 04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All done. ~ HAL333 21:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reliability
  • Not assessed yet
Verifiability
How would I do that? ~ HAL333 14:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Look them up at Worldcat, and scroll down in their respective entries; there should be an oclc listed. Aza24 (talk) 05:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. (Might want to check if I did that correctly.) ~ HAL333 21:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. ~ HAL333 01:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Spotchecks
[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • 140 - y
  • 82a - y
  • 82b - not seeing any of Long tried to place a surtax on newspapers and forbid the publication of "slanderous material", but these efforts were defeated, perhaps wrong page number?
I remember writing this, but I don't think it came from Hamby... I'll keep looking. ~ HAL333 18:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Partly removed/resourced. ~ HAL333 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 174 - y
  • 175 - not really seeing this
I tried to find the correct page bt had no luck. The Williams' references are not my work. I ended up removing this as very similar content can be found earlier. ~ HAL333 18:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 176 - not seeing this, particularly the "dictatorship" part
Ditto. ~ HAL333 18:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 169 - OK
  • 172 - not really seeing this
Does the page skip for you in the Internet Archive as well? ~ HAL333 18:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No..? :) Aza24 (talk) 22:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 121 - y
  • 122 - y
  • 182 - y
  • 190 - y
  • I think I'll need to check more Williams refs, but I want to hear back on the ones I've found issue with first to see if I'm missing anything. Aza24 (talk) 09:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've checked some of Gillette and am seeing no real issues; I would advise, tedious as it is, that you go through the Williams refs (and let me know when you've done so). It's too risky to trust past editors on these things—I've learned this the hard way, as have others Aza24 (talk) 22:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HAL333, this seems to have stalled. Would it be possible for you to respond to Aza24's comment immediately above? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that Gog. I've been swamped with work irl and kept meaning to get to this. Aza24, I have addressed all of the issues with the Williams references. ~ HAL333 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK—Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 17:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Elli

[edit]

So I commented on your talk a few weeks back but I got the time to read this article a bit more thoroughly and I have a few comments (I'd lean towards support but I don't feel confident in my FA-reviewing abilities yet).

Lead
I feel like the slight loss in clarity is worth it for the conciseness. ~ HAL333 15:20, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy -> politics
  • Perhaps mention why Long was no longer a powerful force after the 1960 election. Also "election of 1960" is kinda ambiguous, I wouldn't pipe the link at all and just do 1960 Louisiana gubernatorial election.
The source is referring to all of the elections statewide. I have unlinked and clarified it. ~ HAL333 14:47, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
External links
Removed Sinclair. I tried inserting the latter link into the "Assassination" section but it felt very choppy. ~ HAL333 15:20, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thanks for writing this and sorry if I'm being nitpicky. Elli (talk | contribs) 11:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No - I appreciate it. The devil is in the detail, after all. ~ HAL333 15:31, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: hey, following the guidelines for reviewing FAs I didn't want to !vote here since I haven't ever participated in the FA process before and didn't feel confident in my ability to assess articles to the criteria. However, if I had to pick, I would support it. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from nominator

[edit]

Hey Gog the Mild, this nomination has racked up a few supports, zero opposes, and has had its image and source reviews. Should I try to ask some editors to review it to get some more opinions? ~ HAL333 15:09, 14 April 2021 (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/Huey_Long/archive2&oldid=1018807006"