Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ursula K. Le Guin/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) 19 September 2019 [1].

---

Ursula K. Le Guin

Nominator(s): Vanamonde (Talk) 02:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

This article is about one of the most influential authors of speculative fiction. I have rewritten many of our articles about her stories in the last few years, while building up to rewriting this, so I've gone quite deep into the source material, and I believe it to be comprehensive. I think it's no secret that I'm a fan of her writing, but I've done my best to be dispassionate about the reception she has received, and to give the criticism its due. This article benefited immensely from a detailed review by Mike Christie before I brought it here, and from a GA review by Chiswick Chap. I'm happy to hear all constructive feedback; it's a longish article, but I think you'll find it interesting. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ian Rose and Laser brain: It's possibly you're already looking at this (I noticed LB made an MOS fix earlier), but I wonder if you could assess whether this is ready to be promoted or not; if it is, a quick promotion would be much appreciated. If it isn't, that's quite okay, but I want to take a call on whether I can manage to get it on the main page for 21 October. Regards, Vanamonde (Talk) 16:32, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: I think it's ready. I was just waiting for your response or action on Cas's comment to wrap up. --Laser brain (talk) 16:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I cleared it up just before pinging you. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Source review

- spotchecks not done

• FN1 should be updated to |deadurl=yes - check for others

  Updated; archive-url is functional; searched for alternatives, but this being a personal webpage, was unsuccessful.

• FN13: author name is incorrect

  Fixed, thank you.

• FN21 is missing date

  Fixed, thank you.

• Be consistent in whether refs present authors as lastname, firstname or firstname lastname

  It's that pesky |author=first last parameter. I think I've got them all now.

• FN23: ISBN and link go to a different edition than the one cited

  Odd. Fixed now.

• Fn26: OPB is a publisher

  Changed, thank you.

• Compare FNs 50 and 82 and 84 - check for others

  Good spot, standardized, thanks.

• Quotation marks within quotation marks should be formatted as single quotes

  Are you referring to footnote 80? Fixed; I cannot find any other instances, so please let me know if you were thinking of something else.

• Be consistent in whether you include locations for books, and if you do see MOS:NOTUSA

  I find them quite useless, and included them out of habit/because I copied source formatting from elsewhere; removed.

  Looks like you missed the Nicholls ref. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  Mmm, there were some that used a space between "location" and "=", and I missed those. Now fixed.

• FN172: source gives author name as Em not Emily

  99% certain this is a retrospective name change, but it's displayed as such now, so okay. Fixed.

• Non-English sources should identify language

  Added, thanks.

• FN181 is missing retrieval date

  Added, thanks.

• FN186 has no author - listed author is the publisher

  Fixed, thanks.

• SFWA is a publisher, as is LOC, YALSA, check for others

  Done, thanks. A few others, too.

  Still a few more here - NEA, Reuters. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  Got those...I clicked through everything with "website", and I think I got them all, though I'm uncertain about whether "BBC Radio 4" should be "website" or "work". @Nikkimaria: sorry for the trouble; what do you suggest? Vanamonde (Talk) 20:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  The visible formatting will be identical, but I'd go with work. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

  @Nikkimaria: Thank you: all done, just so you know. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• FN216: Lightspeed is a work

  Done, thanks.

• Don't duplicate Sources in Further reading. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:07, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  Removed. @Nikkimaria: All taken care of, I think. Thanks a lot for a very thorough review. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

• Sup Vanamonde. Just a quickie, but I was wondering about images: do you think you could rustle up a couple more? At >8K words, there's only two in the body. Perhaps colourise the quote boxes too? I'm as much thinking of breaking the text up as conveying information, but of course, I agree they shouldn't be tangential. ——SerialNumber54129 17:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  @Serial Number 54129: Yes, fair. Just found one on commons that I didn't know existed, and there's an old one that I thought I had used but hadn't. The trouble is that she was never a very public figure, and justifying fair use for a biography that has several photos is, I think, difficult. I'll look for stuff that might illustrate the themes section...re: "colourise the quote boxes": what is this magic you speak of? Vanamonde (Talk) 17:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  Added a few. Take a look. Also, any way I could interest you in doing a prose review? Vanamonde (Talk) 19:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Caeciliusinhorto

Yay, Le Guin!

Comments on lead and §Life:

• "seven Hugos" (in lead and section on awards): as of last week, eight: The Books of Earthsea: Complete Illustrated Edition won best art book. (Section on awards also says 24 Hugo noms: it is now 26)

  Yes, thanks for that; it slipped my mind that she may have been nominated again, and I wasn't looking out for it (the numbers were accurate when I wrote the article some months ago).

• "scholar Alfred Kroeber": given the importance of anthropology to many of Le Guin's major works, I would be extremely tempted to describe her father as an anthropologist in the lead – especially as we are describing Charles specifically as a historian and he isn't even notable enough to have his own article.

  Fair enough. Done.

• I am somewhat surprised that Always Coming Home is the only one of Le Guin's books to get two mentions in the lead – I would consider the (unmentioned) Lathe of Heaven to be both more critically acclaimed (nominated for the Nebula and Hugo; won a Locus award) and better known, and even Le Guin's unquestionably most significant works (Left Hand of Darkness, The Dispossessed, "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas") get only a single mention.

  True. The period 1980-1990 was rather a lean one, and I was trying to describe it. I've reworked. I don't think any book should be mentioned more than once in the lead.

• "As a child she had been interested in biology and poetry, but had been limited in her opportunities by her difficulties with mathematics": presumably limited in her biological rather than her poetical ambitions!?

  Tweaked; it's more that she was limited in what she could do rather than her opportunities to do it, or at least that's what Reid says.

• "They got married in Paris in December 1953": "got married" strikes me as colloquial – simply "they married" is more concise and I think tonally more appropriate.

  Done

• "The couple had two daughters, Elisabeth and Caroline, by the time they moved, and a son, Theodore, was born in Portland in 1964." The discussion of Le Guin's children in this paragraph is chronologically a little odd: we hear about Elisabeth's birth in its chronological place (and are given a date); then there is some discussion of the move to Portland, and Le Guin's further Fulbright grants; then we hear about the birth of Caroline (presumably in 1958/59, but the date is never given) and Theodore (with a date, but chronologically out of place). I suggest reworking the paragraph slightly. Suggest something like:

In 1953, while traveling to France aboard the Queen Mary, Ursula met historian Charles Le Guin. They got married in Paris in December 1953. According to Le Guin, the marriage signaled the "end of the doctorate" for her. While her husband finished his doctorate at Emory University in Georgia, and later at the University of Idaho, Le Guin taught French and worked as a secretary until the birth of her daughter Elisabeth in 1957. A second daughter, Caroline, was born in $YEAR. In 1959 Charles became an instructor in history at Portland State University, and the couple moved to Portland, Oregon, where in 1964 their son Theodore was born. They would remain there for the rest of their lives, although Le Guin received further Fulbright grants to travel to London in 1968 and 1975.

Good point, done. Tracking down Caroline's date of birth wasn't too easy...

• "He gave no specific cause for her death, but said it was likely that she had a heart attack" [emphasis mine]: is this not self-contradictory?

  Is it, though? He's speculating.

More anon. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:29, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

• Oh, and also on the same section: "She would continue writing and publishing for more than 50 years, until her death". Two points here: though Le Guin kept writing until her death, both a short story and a non-fiction collection were both published for the first time after it, and a 59-year span of published writing would I think be better described as "nearly 60" than "more than 50" years. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

  Modified.

And the second half of the article:

• The use of italics and quotation marks for titles of works is somewhat inconsistent:
  • "The Dowry of the Angyar" is italicised: as a short story it should certainly be given in quotation marks instead; "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" is sometimes italicised and sometimes given in quotes, again it should be consistently given in quotes.
  • I am less sure about "Paradises Lost": as far as I know, it has only ever been published in collections rather than as a stand alone work, so I would expect it to be in quotation marks, but I think you could make the case that as a novella it should be italicised.
  • When it comes to series, we see both Earthsea series and Earthsea series; Hainish Cycle and Hainish cycle (and the same with Universe/universe, but Hainish novels and Hainish trilogy are consistently lowercased); Annals of the Western Shore is consistently italicised; Catwings consistently (well, in its one appearance) isn't.

I would argue that Paradises Lost should indeed be italicized, as it isn't a short story. Sources italicize it more often than they put it in quotes. Earthsea is complicated; there's both Earthsea the setting and Earthsea the series, and even with respect to the latter, many sources don't italicize it, although my reading of MOS:ITALICS is that we should. I've added italics whereever it's the series being referred to. Italicized "catwings". I've capitalized Hainish Cycle, as that's a proper noun that sources use (though Le Guin didn't like it) and decapitalized the others to "Hainish universe." Anything else?

• "archetypal journey": what is this? So far as I can see, it is never defined. Later we hear about the influence of Jungian archetypes on Le Guin, but not in the context of a journey, and it is not clear if they are related.

  I've expanded a little based on the source; Spivack is tossing around big words a little bit, though, and I'm struggling to break it down into plainer language.

• Why is The Dispossessed not wikilinked in Critical attention? And why is Very Far Away from Anywhere Else wikilinked when it just redirects back to this article?

  The Dispossessed is already linked in the body, not too far up; I'm already bending the rules at WP:OVERLINK, I don't want to toss them out altogether. Very Far Away from Anywhere Else doesn't link here; it redirects to the bibliography...which I think is the best situation until someone writes an article.

• The Diary of the Rose is wikilinked despite there being no article, but none of Le Guin's other article-less works are. Any particular reason?

  To the best of my knowledge I have linked (or redlinked) titles that have obviously viable articles, and left the others out. I would argue, per WP:BKCRIT #5, that all of Le Guin's books are notable; but I don't want a flood of redlinks at the moment.

• Possibly my opinions on which of Le Guin's works are significant is skewed, but The Lathe of Heaven is one of only two of her novels not mentioned in the chronology of her works. Very Far Away From Anywhere Else gets mentioned, and that doesn't even have a stand-alone article! (The other unmentioned novel is The Other Wind, which is perhaps not that important on its own, but it is the final published Earthsea novel, and a brief acknowledgement would fit chronologically and thematically with the mention of The Telling)

  I admit that Lathe of Heaven isn't my favorite, but that wasn't the reason it was neglected; it's relatively ignored by the sources. I think mentioning all the novels is a good suggestion, though, and I've done that now. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:25, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• "Le Guin read both classic and speculative fiction widely as a child. She later said that science fiction did not have much impact on her until she read the works of Theodore Sturgeon and Cordwainer Smith, and that she had sneered at science fiction as a child." Two sentences ending "as a child", and repetition of "science fiction" in the second sentence.

  Tweaked.

• On Jungian archetypes: why are "Shadow" and "Mother" capitalised when "anima" and "animus" are not?

  I checked the sources; they capitalize all of them. Fixed. Good spot.

• The first three Earthsea novels together follow Ged from youth to old age, and each of them also follow the coming of age of a different character. A Wizard of Earthsea focuses on Ged's adolescence and coming of age, and along with the other two works of the original Earthsea trilogy forms a part of Le Guin's dynamic portrayal of the process of growing old. It feels like there is some redundancy here, and the idea could be expressed better and more concisely.

  I've reworked this; on reflection I think Spivack's point is too subtle to be explained briefly, and this article cannot afford a lengthy explanation of a minor point.

• Le Guin's novella The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas Surely "Omelas" isn't a novella! It won the Hugo in 1974 for Short Story, and by that time the novella/novelette/short story distinction was firmly in place. And everything I have ever read about it describes it as a short story.

  Yeah, this is just a mistake. It's not only a short story, it's a very short short story; it's about seven pages, IIRC.

• I am not entirely convinced that the photo of Annie Lennox adds anything to the article. Even if an image of androgyny would, Lennox didn't really become famous until a good decade after Left Hand!

  True...but it was honestly the best I could do to find an image that was free use, but that wasn't just of Le Guin. I don't think the connection is stretched, honestly; Androgynous looks did become popular only much later, which is partly why TLHOD is considered pathbreaking.

• several remained in print many decades after their first publication: perhaps several remain in print?

  Done.

• For her novels alone she won [...] one World Fantasy Award [...] Other awards won by Le Guin include [...] two World Fantasy Awards.

  Removed that bit.

• She won her final Hugo [...] in the year of her death, for the essay collection No Time to Spare: Thinking About What Matters: no longer true.

  Modified

• Her last publication was a 2018 collection of non-fiction, titled Dreams Must Explain Themselves and Other Essays 1972–2004. the source cited does not support this: several other works were published in 2018, and it makes no comment on the order. Digging around, it looks like Dreams was published in February ([2]). I know of three Le Guin books to post-date that: Conversations on Writing was published in July ([3]), So Far So Good: Poems 2014-2018 in September ([4]), and The Books of Earthsea in October ([5]). Books of Earthsea doesn't have anything in it which hadn't previously been published, so I guess you might not be counting that, but I believe both Conversations and So Far So Good both contained material which had not previously been published...

  Yeah, this is complicated...the sources are fuzzy on specific details, newer editions often have something unique, like an introduction, and I don't want my wording to go out of date in a couple of months. I've modified it to something that will give me more wiggle room, and will work on fixing the bibliography.

Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@Caeciliusinhorto and Caeciliusinhorto-public: I've worked my way through all your comments, I think; let me know if there's anything that needs further change. Thanks very much for the review. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:38, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks like you have fixed almost all of my issues.

• I am still unconvinced by He gave no specific cause for her death, but said it was likely that she had a heart attack. Whether or not it is certainly the cause, "heart attack" is still a specific cause, I think.
• You've edited the comment about Le Guin's final publication in the section on Chronology of writings, but it's also in the section entitled Bibliography.

Other than that, the article is looking in excellent shape. Le Guin was a major writer, and this must have been an enormous undertaking – congratulations! Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Caeciliusinhorto: Okay, fair enough. Both done now. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Caeciliusinhorto: since you've been active, wanted to make sure you hadn't missed this. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Vanamonde—Sorry about the delay in replying. I made a brief review of the literature and haven't been able to find any glaring omissions from the article. There is a festschrift which may have some useful things in it? It looks like it's more personal reflections from other genre writers rather than critical analysis, though. I haven't checked image copyright or spotchecked sources, but otherwise I believe this article meets the Featured article criteria and am happy to support. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I've already used several reflections on her career that came from her fellow writers just after her death (including some from the same authors listed in that volume, and which might well be the same pieces); I don't want to overburden the article with that sort of material. Thanks for pointing it out though. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:30, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Support from Chiswick Chap

As a rough peasant from the simple fields of GAN, I always feel somewhat diffident at the courts of the FAC. Having further already reviewed the article to GA standard, it's also somewhat difficult to take a fresh look. However, the additional polishing has improved the article, and perhaps introduced a couple of wrinkles.

• "Lady Frazer" - seems an unlikely redlink, certainly with that as a heading. Elizabeth (Lilly) Grove Frazer wrote Leaves of the Golden Bough and was married to Frazer; remarkably, [Sir] James George Frazer's article doesn't even mention her or the marriage! Maybe we should drop the honorific and give her her actual name. It'd be nice if she at least had a redirect and a paragraph to redirect to, too, though that's beyond the call of duty.

  Fair point. I've piped it to "Elizabeth Grove Frazer", but left the link as reading "Lady Frazer" because that's how both the book commentary (in Nature, no less...) and Le Guin refer to her. I also added a paragraph to James Frazer; it was bugging me that there's a mention there of his sister's marriage, but not of his own? Bizarre.

• I see I'm not the only person to be a bit discomfited to find an image of the magnificent Annie Lennox. Having pressed for images in several Le Guin articles, I ought to be pleased at the illustrations here; I know how hard it is to find anything suitable and CC-by-SA. However, unless a reliable source has linked Le Guin's advocacy of androgyny to Lennox I think the image's inclusion is a risky stretch bordering on original research.

  Ah well. Okay. Removed.

• On the other images, it is certainly a shame that all the photos of Le Guin are in old age (the youngest a sprightly 55); a balance would be far preferable. Perhaps we might find suitable grounds for including one younger historic image with NFUR. This one from the 1970s has her holding a pipe? Hmm.

  It is indeed a shame, but what I've been told is that NFUR is difficult to justify when free-use images of the subject are already available...

• One other thing is about sexism; her earliest writing was published as "U.K. Le Guin"; I recall reading that she quickly stopped this when she realized her editor was passing her off as a male writer. I suspect you'll easily find the source for that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:42, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

I recall reading that she specifically expressed regret that she had published "Nine Lives" in Playboy as "U.K. Le Guin". I could probably find the source for this if pressed. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:15, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

That would be very kind. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:22, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

That had me quailing at the prospect of going through all 400-500 of my science fiction anthologies, but happily it was in one of Le Guin's: The Wind's Twelve Quarters: Volume I (1975). Le Guin writes a one page introduction. Quite interesting. If you, or Vanamonde, send me a (blank) email, I will send you a photograph of it back. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:47, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. In the Panther Granada 1978 edition, it's on page 128, and she does call it "sexual prejudice". Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:15, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Unless I've very much mistaken, this was the only instance of such a thing: I certainly haven't come across any others. I've emailed Gog the Mild for the source, and I'll add it soon as I get it. Chiswick Chap I've responded to everything. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:13, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93:Hopefully it arrived several hours ago. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: It did; I was briefly offline; but also I'm uncertain of the page number. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

That's fine. I rarely use my Gog email, so was concerned that it hadn't sent. P. 128. As CC says. I have also sent you a page on Ishi, see below, which I found thought provoking; you may or may not. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap:: Added, for the record. Gog the Mild I'll take a look in a moment. I actually wrote the page on Ishi in Two Worlds, so I have a fair bit of material, but thanks for that page anyhow. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:20, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks. I see you've dealt with it under Early work which is fair enough. Of course it has a connection with the Gender and sexuality topic though more as history than as as Theme, so it's probably best where it is. I'm happy to Support. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Le Guin has a couple of minor amusing details to add in this short piece; I doubt you've room for it in this article but it might be usable in a sub-article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hah, thanks for pointing that out. I seem to recall reading that piece at some point, and it was bothering me...I think you're right in saying that there isn't room for it in this article, though. We're already at 8k+ words. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Support by Gog the Mild

• "a "major voice in American Letters" " Two things: 1. The MoS requires that "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion" [emphasis in original]. This (IMO) applies to leads, and the quote (IMO) is an opinion. 2. Why the italics? I assume from the italics and upper case initials that it is a journal. In which case will many readers understand that without explanation? (Or is it a multiple typo?)

  The italics were a mistake, now fixed. The MOS issue...In principle, I agree with you. In this case, however; the quote is already in the body, where White is named in the text; and the citation for the quote is in the lead, right after the quote; so, I'd rather not, because it would be disruptive to the flow. But. I'm willing to discuss it further, if you feel strongly.

• The first paragraph ends with a comma.

  Fixed.

• An optional thought: Add half a sentence to "who was the last known member of the Yahi tribe" explaining how this came to be. (I have always been struck by how Jared Diamond's photograph cation of Ishi (in The Third Chimpanzee) could have been lifted from/inserted into The Word for World is Forest and assumed that they came from a similar source – the work by Le Guin's mother.) These circumstances clearly had a considerable influence on her work and it would be nice to nod to them as we pass. (Perhaps ' ... ,after it was exterminated by white settlers in a series of genocidal massacres.' [cite: Diamond (1993), p. 303] or similar?) Unless you would prefer to develop this "Influences" section?

  I've added a bit using a review of Kroeber's volume; I prefer that to Diamond, who is somewhat further removed from the proceedings.

Bed time. More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay in getting on with this.

I have done a little copy editing, which you will want to check.

• Optional: "They would remain there for the rest of their lives" As that is not literally true, is there a more felicitous way of phrasing it?

  Reworded

• "a teacher at the undergraduate level." Genuine query: should that definite article be there?

  This sounds correct to me; however, I have rephrased to make the phrase flow more naturally.

• "delivered a Commencement speech" Lower case c.

  Fixed.

• "while her first short story was" Should 'published' be in there?

  I guess. Fixed, also another instance later.

• "four other stories followed in the next few years, in Fantastic or Amazing Stories. Among them were "The Dowry of the Angyar" " I am looking at an introduction to this last by Le Guin where she says it "was actually the eighth story I got printed". If you are sure of your facts, then fine, but I could not help but notice the apparent inconsistency.

  Excellent spot, thank you. I'm not sitting next to my bookshelf at the moment, but White's own bibliography seems to contradict that; so I suspect that on p.45 she was somehow referring to a subset of those stories, and I missed that point. Fixed.

• "The first two were published as half of an "Ace Double" " Would that be 'The first two were each published as half of an "Ace Double" '?

  Done.

• "and reconciling opposing forces" Would this be more consistent as 'and the reconciliation of opposing forces'?

  Yes, it would. Done.

• "from this period were later anthologized in the 1975 collection The Wind's Twelve Quarters" I doubt that many readers would take that to mean that TWTQ included work from as early as 1962. Why not simply give the period, instead of "this period"?

  I don't really like having two different date ranges in quick succession; I've added the clarifying "including her first; does that work?

• "all of which were released after her death in January 2018" A natural reading of this is likely to imply that the works were all released in January 2018. As the date of her death has already been given, perhaps delete "in January 2018"? Or replace with the actual period during which they were published? A similar comment applies to the similar statement in "Bibliography".

  Hmm. In the absence of the common I wouldn't parse it the way you did, but I guess it is ambiguous. Removed, and let's see if someone else grumbles.

• "major voice in American Letters" in the lead; why the upper case L?

  Not sure, to be honest, but that's how White does it, and it is a quote.

Fair enough, I suppose.

Gog the Mild (talk) 19:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: I don't know how I completely missed the fact that you had posted the rest of your review, but I did. I came here to nudge you into responding and saw it. Apologies, and I believe I have now responded to everything. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Nice. A fine article. Worthy of its subject. Supporting. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Mike Christie

Support. My comments are on the talk page, and every issue I raised there has been dealt with. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Ishi.jpg: Broken source link.

All images seem to be in suitable sections; no ALT text that I can see. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: There are two links in the image description; the second still works. I've removed the first. I could try to add alt text, I suppose, but it seems to me that when the images are essentially of standing or seated people, there's nothing the alt could add that isn't already in the caption. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:30, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

ALT text is a mite complicated. If the image serves a purpose (isn't just decorative, e.g a map) the ALT text needs to substitute for that function. If the image is purely decorative, no ALT text is needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Okay, that's about what I thought; I would say that all the images are decorative, broadly speaking. Also; I just decided to switch a picture out [6] but the new one's an FP, I doubt there's issues with it. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

That file seems OK as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:19, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from Cas Liber

Taking a look...

• Would be good if not all four paras started with her name or variant thereof.

  Good point, tweaked one of them; the other's are harder to do without contorted sentence structure.

Apart from that, nothing is jumping out at me - nice work. Given the lack of anything else, the above is not stricly a dealbreaker, so support on comprehensiveness and prose. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:30, 19 September 2019 (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) 16:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

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