Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/St Donat's Castle/archive1

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

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 13:31, 9 July 2018 [1].

---

St Donat's Castle

Nominator(s): KJP1 (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

This article is about a little castle in a corner of South Wales. It has quite an interesting history. The article received a very helpful Peer Review and I look forward to any and all further comments/suggestions here. A quick note on two of the sources. I've not been able to find the page numbers for the Venning or the Procter, although both can easily be viewed as Google snippets. Neither is essential, and both could go if necessary. Better still would be if an editor had access to the sources. KJP1 (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments and Support by Chetsford

This article is surpassed in its nice illustrations only by its pleasantly readable prose. Most sources are available online in some form or the other so it was easy to check and, insofar as I can tell, everything looks okay. This also seems to be as comprehensive as anything out there about St Donat's Castle. I support it contingent on remedy of a few minor concerns ...

• A number of images lack ALT fields.

Will attend to those. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - now Done. Hope they meet the need as I've no experience of writing alt text. KJP1 (talk) 11:39, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• This line - "Of St Donat's, Shaw was quoted as saying, "This is what God would have built if he had had the money"." - is sourced to a Wordpress site which, itself, may not be RS but is no longer active and is currently unarchived in any case.

Y - That's a pity, as it was a nice site. Replaced the source. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• Per MOS:EMPHASIS, Citizen Kane should be italicized.

Y - Done. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• Per MOS:LEADLENGTH, the ideal lead for an article of this length is two or three paragraphs, and this article has a four paragraph lead. While LEADLENGTH is not a fast rule, it seems to be a guideline that makes sense to follow in the case of this specific article.

Get the point and agree. Will look to trim to three. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - Now done. In my defence, I think it originally was three and it appears to have become four when the distance from Llantwit was added. Howsoever, it's now three as per MoS. KJP1 (talk) 11:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• Is "Cadw" supposed to be in all caps here: "but both Alan Hall and CADW sugges"?

It shouldn't be but I can't find it. Will keep looking. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - Now found and corrected. KJP1 (talk) 11:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• "The castle site offers natural defences, in the form of steeps slopes to two sides and the coast to a third." Is "steeps" supposed to be "steep"?

Y - yes indeed. Now Done. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• In this sentence - "The unprotected, eastern, side is encircled by a deep, dry moat." - "eastern" is treated as a paranthetical expression, however, unless I'm mistaken the use of paranthetical expressions is limited to phrases and clauses and I don't think "eastern" is either of those in the way it's used. In other words, could both of the commas be eliminated? I'm not 100% sure on this point.

Y - Done. A bit above my paygrade and should probably have waited for Mr Riley, but have amended in a way that hopefully works. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Don't look to me for reliable help with commas. I am in a continual tangle with the bloody things. I think Chetsford is right, but I'm absolutely no authority. Tim riley talk 15:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Chetsford (talk) 10:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Chetsford - Really grateful for the super-quick response and delighted you found the article an interesting read. Shall get straight on to your comments. KJP1 (talk) 10:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Hope the issues raised have now been addressed. Really appreciate the interest and the improvements. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 11:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

They are - perfect! Chetsford (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments and support from Gerda

Thank you for a nice excuse not to deal with another recent death: turn to a lovely article instead.

Lead

• How about a year for the death in duel? 19th century comes late in what follows.

Y - Done.

• I think we don't need Hearst's given names twice in the lead, nor his name twice, just separated by a full stop.

Y - Done.

The de Stradlings

• That's a strange header - "the de", but I'd not know no repair. Perhaps "Stradling family"?

Y - Done.

• link the keep?

Y - Done.

• "at a slightly later date," - how about simply "later"?

Y - Done.

• "A number achieved more than local fame." - I don't believe it ;) - a number of them, or something more elegant?

Y - Done.

• "fought for and funded Charles I" - I may be the only one to think "for and funded" sounds strange.

Y - Done.

Decline

• "unscholarly (and) inauthentic" - why not "unscholarly inauthentic"?

Don't think that would quite flow. I'll see if I can rework the quote.

Y - Now Done, by rewording. KJP1 (talk) 16:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

• any chance to link Edwardian somewhere else, not from a quote?

I see what you mean. Let me have a think. KJP1 (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - Done now.

Citizen K

• I believe that "ruthless" remodelling (or something else) should go to the lead, also would love the Shaw quote there, but know that some hate quotes in the lead ;)

Y - Done. But I'll need to put the cites in. KJP1 (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Lovely stories around the place, including the lives saved, - thank you. More later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt - Many thanks. The castle does indeed have a great story to tell. Shall get on to your comments soonest. KJP1 (talk) 13:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much for all done, - I improved the other, and will be out now. Hope to back tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Architecture

• "restorations of Nicholl Carne, Morgan Williams and Hearst himself", - I'd give them all given names, or none, and don't think "himself" adds.

Y - Done.

• I'd love a plan. The description is probably correct, but I don't "see" buildings and courts when reading.

N - So would I, but sadly I don't know how to do them.

Interior

• "beasts of the Apostles" - why Apostles, when the link goes correctly to the Evangelists. Can we trust that readers know about the beasts (or "living creatures" or symbols)?

Y - Done.

• link Devon?

Y - Done.

• The sentence about the listed building comes a bit as surprise in "description".
  • I know what you mean, but I think it's better here than elsewhere.

Thank you again, lovely reading. The minor points are just suggestions, I am ready to support. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt - Gerda - many thanks again. Shall address these tomorrow. Absolutely agree about a plan. I'd love one too as they hugely help understanding of complex structures, but I'm just not able to do one! KJP1 (talk) 20:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt - Gerda, thanks indeed for the comments and for the Support. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 12:12, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Could you perhaps cast an eye on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56/archive1? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:38, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt - Would be pleased to have a look and shall do so tomorrow. Although music articles are not my forte! I've never recovered from being thrown out of the school choir by the music master, who said I had the worst singing voice he'd ever heard. KJP1 (talk) 19:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

So sorry for that never-healing wound! If only teachers knew what they are inflicting ... - Comments always welcome, and especially by someone not familiar with the topic, but by now several looked, so take your time. The composer mentioned above appeared on RD, and I am pleased about that. (My last such attempt failed.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Support Comments from Jim

Great piece of research, but I have few nitpicks, the first of which deters me from immediate support. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:06, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

• I'm not enthralled by the lead. The first paragraph seems to summarise the summary, so we have Hearst and Atlantic College mentioned twice, but on the other hand there is no indication that the castle is on the coast, so it was a complete surprise when I started reading about the RNLI two-thirds through (as you may have gathered, I've not visited this site)

Y - A very good point. I've rewritten and re-read it so many times, that I'd become blind to what it actually was saying! You're quite right, para. 1 was like a lead within a lead. I've now tried a, further, re-write to give it better flow and remove the repetition. If you were able to review, I'd be very grateful.

• ultimately, in the county— it's some time since we have mentioned the county, perhaps "Glamorgan" instead?

Y - Done.

• Red and one for Fallow deer— Caps inconsistent, either all lc as in their articles, or capped as "Red and one for Fallow Deer", style often seen in books.

Y - Done.

• The castle was designated a Grade I listed building, the highest possible grade reserved for buildings of exceptional interest, in 1952—perhaps give the reason for designation summary from the source?

Y - Done and Done.

• I don't like all the links in your book sources, as far as I checked they all appeared to be links to Worldcat listings or Google book advertisements. I think the point of a url link is to take the reader to useful content, and personally I never link to journals or books unless they have permanently available full free text. I know you've written other FAs, so I assume that your practice is acceptable, and I'm just registering a concern that you are free to ignore.

N - for now. I absolutely take the point, and another editor made it in relation to Cragside. They particularly disliked the Google links, on grounds of commerciality, and I now try to only use Worldcat, unless the Google link gives a useful snippet, as it does here. Personally, I must confess to a weakness for the links, and they've not proved deal breakers in the past. But I'm quite open to removing them if that's the consensus. I strongly suspect Brian B, who I'm hoping to see when he's put Guy Burgess to bed, will be firmly in the "remove" camp!

I'm 100% with Jim on this. It drives me barmy when I click on a link expecting to read a page from a book and find instead just the name of the publisher and the ISBN etc. Tim riley talk 15:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Duly noted. I feel the groundswell of opinion on this may be moving in a direction not entirely to my advantage.....KJP1 (talk) 17:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Jimfbleak - Jim, many thanks indeed for the comments. I shall go through them later today. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 07:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Jimfbleak - Many thanks for the comments, especially the first one, and for the interest. I hope the revisions are acceptable. With all best wishes. KJP1 (talk) 15:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Reads much better, happy to support now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Very much appreciated, and the lead's much the better for your comments. KJP1 (talk) 16:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley

I enjoyed reading this article for PR and I enjoyed it again just now. Seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. A few odds and ends of no great consequence but worth a brief look, maybe:

• Lead
  • "the Celtic chieftan Caradog" – I don't suppose the Celts had a special spelling of "chieftain", but I wasn't quite confident enough to change "chieftan" myself. Over to you.

Y - You know bloody well it's my typing and not a Celtic variant!

• History
  • "The Winning of the Lordship of Glamorgan out of Welshmens' Hands" – just checking again that the possessive apostrophe is in that position in the original, as opposed to "Welshmen's hands", as we would now write. I'm not sure the matter was sorted out definitively at PR.

Y - Good catch, and it wasn't resolved. This, [2] clearly has the possessive apostrophe where you think it should be, as do the other inline sources I've found. So duly amended with apologies.

• Citizen Kane's domain: 1925–1960
  • Heading: I'm delighted to see that reviewers at PR and, so far, here, haven't been so po-faced as to object to this title, which I think is whimsical but perfect.
  • "a nighttime tour" – the OED punctuates "night-time", as (even more importantly, of course) do I.

Y - Done.

• "Ivor Novello and George Bernard Shaw" – have I not previously registered my usual plea for the piping of Bernard Shaw's name to give him the courtesy of the title he insisted on, and which most reputable scholars give him? Not something I can insist on, I admit.

Y - You have indeed and I got it right in the lead, but wrong here. Now corrected.

Nothing there to prevent my registering my support. Excellent stuff. – Tim riley talk 15:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Tim riley - Greatly appreciate your support and comments here, and your input at PR. Many thanks, and congratulations on Elizabeth David. I hope the clean-up after her TFA appearance wasn't too arduous. KJP1 (talk) 16:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Tim riley p.s. - Tim - sorry, I did have a query. What do you think of "rooves" as opposed to "roofs" in the lead. I believe it's ok, if a bit archaic, but when I see it "on the page", it looks odd to me. And will it confuse non-native speakers? KJP1 (talk) 16:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I always use "roofs" as the plural of "roof", and I'm quite sure it is the more usual form, but the OED is perfectly OK with "rooves", and if that's your preference I'd stick with it. (It may conceivably be significant [sic] that I didn't notice the spelling.) – Tim riley talk 17:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Source review

All the online sources I can access, which is most of them. say what the citations here say they say. The citation style is a little inconsistent: some online citations lack issue/access dates. I don't look to have both, but I think there should be one or other in:

• "Archbishop James Ussher". www.libraryireland.com.
• "Atlantic Arts". www.stdonats.com.
• "Listed Buildings - Full Report - HeritageBill Cadw Assets - Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net. (hyphen should be an en dash, too)
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "Listed Buildings – Full Report – HeritageBill Cadw Assets – Reports". cadwpublic-api.azurewebsites.net.
• "LIU WRH – Collection Highlights". www.liucedarswampcollection.org.
• "Penhow Castle". www.castlexplorer.co.uk.
• "St Donats Arts Centre - Theatres Trust". database.theatrestrust.org.uk.
• "St Donats Arts Centre, Theatre, Vale Of Glamorgan, Wales". www.visitwales.com.
• "St Donat's Castle" (PDF). Could do with source info too.
• "St Donat's Castle". www.parksandgardens.org.
• "St Donats Castle, Castle/Fort, Vale Of Glamorgan, Wales". www.visitwales.com.
• "St Donat's Castle; Atlantic College; United World College of the Atlantic, St Donat's". Coflein.
• "'St Donat's: Part of the Castle, with the Watchtower Beyond', Joseph Mallord William Turner, 1798 – Tate". Tate Gallery.
• "STRADLING, Sir John, 1st Bt. (1563–1637), of St. Donat's Castle, Glam. – History of Parliament Online". www.historyofparliamentonline.org.
  • And Stradling should be in ulc.
• "Stradling-Carne of St Donats Castle papers". arcw.llgc.org.uk.
• "The Old Swan". Llantwit Major History Society.

And

• Refs 3 and 41 are one and the same
• Ref 94 lacks a page number.

Y - All the above done, I hope! KJP1 (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

These are small presentational points, which of course need tweaking, but the sourcing seems to me otherwise admirable. Tim riley talk 21:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Tim riley - Tim, very much appreciated. Quite above and beyond. I shall attend to all these later today. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:58, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Tim riley - with a rather throbbing head, I think I've now done of all these, with the exception of the bloody en-dashes. Do they matter? Is there a helpful script? Help! KJP1 (talk) 15:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Fine now. I've dealt with the dashes. One last point (sorry for missing it before): refs 62 and 64 are one and the same and should be amalgamated. With that minor caveat the source review is now satisfactorily signed off. – Tim riley talk 16:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - 62 & 64 now combined. Many thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 17:07, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Support by Ceoil

Have read this article closely three times now; during the PR, in the interim, and in the last hour or so. Have taken the liberty of editing directly rather than a protracted back and forth, so please feel free to revert. Great stuff; I was gripped each time. Support on prose and story telling. My only remaining material gripe is that the image in the infobox is a little small; maybe Gerda could do something there. Ceoil (talk) 23:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Ceoil - Many thanks for your input and comments at PR and your enhancements and Support here. Very pleased with all of your amendments, none of which I'd want to change. With all best wishes. KJP1 (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Image review

• File:St.Donats2.jpg needs a US PD tag

Y - Done.

• File:HearstAbout1910.jpg: when/where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Nikkimaria - Many thanks indeed for having a look at the images. The first one, I've tagged as suggested. I'm afraid I've no idea about the second as I just picked it up from Commons. It's the best there but, if necessary, I could replace it. Some of the others appear to have been released by the Library of Congress, so I suppose they'd be ok? Could you advise? Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 13:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

[3]

Essentially for the given tag you need to be able to show pre-1923 publication, not just creation. If you're looking to swap images several of the ones in that Commons category meet that, eg Arena_magazine_-_Volume_35_(1906)_(14577938059).jpg or Hon._William_Randolph_Hearst,_1906.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Y - Done. Many thanks. It doesn't work quite so well, but unfortunately we've none of Hearst in the 1920s which would be best. Thanks indeed for the review. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Support by Richard Nevell

The medieval history of the site looks a touch light compared to the 20th century, though perhaps not surprisingly given the wealth of information that is on Hearst. Have you checked Anthony Emery's Greater Medieval Houses to see what he has to say? I think it would also be worth noting the RCAHMW investigation of the site since that identified the 12th century keep which hadn't previously been appreciated. Richard Nevell (talk) 20:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Richard Nevell - Many thanks. You're of course right that it's always possible to add more. If there's something specific on the castle's medieval history that you think should be covered, I'd be delighted to include it. I don't have Emery, but my library may have a copy that I could check if you think there's something that should be included. I'm not getting anything online in relation to the RCHME. If you could point me in the direction of anything that's available, I'd very much appreciate it. KJP1 (talk) 21:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Spuregon (1993) mentions the reinterpretation. I presume it was the result of a building survey rather than desk based assessment, but it's not clear from how it's written. Perhaps the 2000 RCAHMW volume currently cited might go into more detail? If it doesn't, I think it might be a dead end as I couldn't find more in the Historic Environment Record. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Richard Nevell - Very helpful and many thanks. I shall have a look at the RCAHMW again tomorrow and see if I can extract something on the keep. Tantalisingly, the Spuregon is giving me the first line about St Donat's but nothing more. You don't have full access by any chance? KJP1 (talk) 22:45, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Richard Nevell - You were right to think the RCAHMW survey might have more. It references their, on-site, identification of the original Norman stone castle and notes that this was missed in their earlier survey, undertaken in the 1960s when the castle was being reconfigured to accommodate Atlantic College. I've put two references in, at the end of the first paragraphs of the Architecture and Description and Exterior sections. I hope they meet the need but I'd be pleased to expand it if you think something more is required or if the Spurgeon source has something that would warrant inclusion? Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:57, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

p.s. Have now added Emery as a source, but again, I'm afraid it focusses on the Hearst period, not the medieval! KJP1 (talk) 10:54, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

p.p.s. And have now added a snippet from the Spurgeon article, which draws a very nice link with the church. Many thanks indeed for your help, suggestions and interest. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Hope it's not too late for me to switch to support. Good work with the article. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

@Richard Nevell: KJP1 is temporarily unable to edit Wikipedia (being in a country where access is blocked), and he has asked me to record his thanks here for your support. Tim riley talk 19:36, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Support from SchroCat

Another punter from the PR. The article has been strengthened since then, and on prose terms it passes the criteria. - SchroCat (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

SchroCat - Very much appreciated and glad you enjoyed it. For a small castle in a quiet Welsh corner, it’s had a surprisingly eventful history. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 13:16, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Comment from SN54129

Nice article, KPG1, as perfectly sculptured as its subject  :) Just one thing really; I can...senssse a gap in the literature, particularly for your medieval coverage (which, being, a medieval castle I suggest is its most important period as a working building, but, yes, MRDA, I know!) I'm thinking, for example, Stan Awbery and Ralph Griffiths on the Stradling / St Donats connection (1967 & 1968 respectively), Graham Thomas on the family library, or R. G. Williams on aspects of the Castle's chapel and church (1935). I see you use Whittle, but she did a tihng (1999?) specifically on the Tudor gardens too. No mention of the "miracle cross" of St Donats? See T. G. Law, 1886. Basically, I just think a little more could perhaps be mined to really fill out the earlier period.

Have a good holiday KP! Try not to get rounded up with all the other subversives  ;) :D —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 11:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129 - Hi SN54129 and glad you liked the article. The castle does have rather an extraordinary history. I'd of course be very happy to expand the medieval coverage if you think there's something significant missing. The "Miracle Cross", for example, has quite extensive coverage, e.g.[4], and I could certainly put something in. You'll have seen from the above that Richard was rightly keen to have something on recent interpretations of the castle's Norman architecture, and I think that's been dealt with. So, if there's something specific from the authorities you mention, if you could indicate what, that would be most helpful. But it will have to wait, I'm afraid, for the reasons mentioned below. I'm in Istanbul from tomorrow and I don't think they currently permit access to Wikipedia, although reports vary. We shall see. I shall certainly seek to avoid arrest! Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129 - Having avoided arrest by departing just before Erdogan's big Istanbul rally, I've:

• Added a little from Thomas on the library;
• Included a little more on the medieval occupants and expanded the sources;
• Referenced the "miraculous cross" with a couple of sources.

I unfortunately don't have Awbery. Is there anything in there you'd specifically like to see? If there is, I'd be most pleased to add it. I could also expand on the Whittle a little, but I think the significance of the "finest Renaissance garden in Wales" is made clear. Let me know. Thanks again and all the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Query for the coordinators

Ian Rose - Hi Ian, it's me nagging again. We stand at 6 Supports, with cleared image and source reviews, and comments to which I hope I've responded adequately. My issue is that I go abroad at the end of this week and won't have access to the sources for a while. If it were possible to wrap this up by Friday, that would be helpful. If it isn't, not a problem and I certainly don't want to try and rush things. I'll just let any further commentators know that they may have to wait a while for a response. With many thanks and all the best. KJP1 (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, this might be a bit more of a problem. Wikipedia is currently blocked where I'm going, so it may not be possible to access at all. Not sure as to the best way forward? KJP1 (talk) 07:36, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

While I agree the nom has garnered a good deal of support in a relatively short time, as a rule I prefer to give the community at least a couple of weeks to look things over. How long will you be away? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Ian Rose - absolutely understood. It's my fault, I should have nominated sooner, or held back. I'm away until the middle of June. If responses can wait, that's fine. I'm just concerned that the current ban on Wikipedia in Turkey, I'm going to be in Istanbul, might make me completely incommunicado. What about if I put a note to that effect up here? Would that work? Sorry to be a pain. KJP1 (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Maybe if the coords were willing to let it open until your return, and a few of us kept an eye for the easier responses on prose etc. Ceoil (talk) 22:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Ceoil - That would be really helpful. Many thanks. KJP1 (talk) 04:27, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, mid-June is not a prob, by then it will still have been open barely a month. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:59, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Support from Fifelfoo

I engaged in terms of sourcing and research quality, which were satiated by the careful description of issues in dispute in the history of the place. I do not expect a historiography section to be relevant thereby. Nor do I find any indication of a myth of a Clean Wehrmacht issue. I found the language gripping given my disinterest in stately homes and medieval sites. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Fifelfoo - Dear Fifelfoo, most glad you found it a gripping read and thank you for your interest and support. I have to confess to not quite getting the Clean Wermacht issue - indeed I initially wondered if you'd intended to offer Support to another article! But your final comment suggests not. If I am missing something, do let me know and I'd be very happy to make an amendment. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 17:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

In April 2018 the Milhist project's Bugle covered a major problem in editorial trends, basically a tendency to sanitise social and political history, particularly of practices considered morally abhorrent, in articles. So it is something that needs an eye kept on it. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Fifelfoo - Ah, understood. Many thanks indeed. KJP1 (talk) 06:46, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. --Laser brain (talk) 13:31, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.