Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Walt Whitman and Abraham Lincoln/archive1

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

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 5 September 2021 [1].

Walt Whitman and Abraham Lincoln

[edit]
Nominator(s): Eddie891 Talk Work 23:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After fairly extensive peer reviewing, with comments from Hog Farm (GA), SandyGeorgia and Z1720 (PR), Twofingered Typist (GOCE), ImaginesTigers (informal, on article talk), as well as some off-wiki discussions I feel this article meets the FA criteria. Eddie891 Talk Work 23:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • Frontispiece image is missing alt text
    • Added (hopefully well enough)
  • Suggest scaling up the lecture announcement
    • Done
  • File:Walt_Whitman_-_Brady-Handy_restored.png needs a US tag. Ditto File:Lincoln_assassination_slide_c1900_-_Restoration.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOC's dates are publication/creation, so without being able to identify a publication venue we don't know which of those two it was. For that image you could instead use the Brady Handy tag. For the second, again, is that creation or publication? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, okay, so copies of it were being sold at that time? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikkimaria yes, that's my understanding of the matter. The source says Sold together with a standard 4" x 3" slide depicting the same scene, circa 1900. Does that work for proof of publishing? Eddie891 Talk Work 13:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt - Support

[edit]
  • It might be mentioned near the end of the lede that "My Captain" has dimmed in popular and critical regard in recent decades.
  • Added a sentence to that thought
  • "was raised on the frontier in the early 19th century, mainly in Illinois," Lincoln spent less than half of what we would today consider "childhood years" in Illinois (and adult responsibility came earlier then)
  • Amended
  • "Whitman's wartime experience informed his poetry maturing into reflections on death and youth, the brutality of war and patriotism." This may need rephrasing, not sure it makes sense as it stands.
  • rephrased
  • "In June 1865, the Secretary of the Interior James Harlan discovered a copy of Leaves of Grass and fired Whitman from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, describing the collection as "obscene"." Commas are probably needed around Harlan's name.
  • Added
  • " "idiomatic Western genius"" It might be worth mentioning, perhaps in a footnote, that Lincoln was a Westerner by the standards of the US at the time. Illinois of course is no longer considered a Western state.
  • I think it's been established that Lincoln is from the frontier which is essentially the furthest west the country was at the time so this is unnecessary, but open to being convinced otherwise
  • "and when Whitman visited John Hay at the White House.[26]" Some brief description of Hay as one of Lincoln's private secretaries may help the reader here. Is it worth mentioning why Whitman visited Hay (i.e., what did Whitman want?)?
  • Done both, added the explanation as a note because it's kinda long
  • You are inconsistent in your capitalization of "Union".
  • Standardized
  • "readings of poems" Is "poetry readings" a more popular term?
  • Yes
  • "Shortly after Lincoln's assassination, hundreds of poems had been composed about his death." Should "had been" be "were"?
  • sure
  • "Vendler considered Whitman's Lincoln poems lasted the best of all the poetry written on Lincoln from that era.[35]" This may also need a rewrite.
  • tweaked. Better?
  • added
Support Looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius

[edit]

I will add some comments soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

  • and was deeply affected by his assassination, writing several poems as elegies and giving a series of lectures on Lincoln. - Should we mention the date of his assassination in this sentence, rather than in the next paragraph? (It may make the sentence a little long, which is why I'm asking.)
  • IMO the sentence is already pretty long and I think given that it's mentioned right in the beginning of the next sentence it's OK as is, but I'm not wedded to that interpretation.
  • The poems were well received and popular upon publication—particularly "My Captain!"— - Perhaps "—particularly "My Captain!"—" should go directly after "The poems" as that is what the parenthetical is referring to.
  • sure

Support from Girth Summit

[edit]

This is an excellent article, and I expect to support it wholeheartedly. A brilliant piece of work. The following comments should be taken as suggestions, rather than requirements for my support, but please consider:

  • "Whitman first saw Lincoln as he traveled through New York City on February 19, 1861." Who is traveling through NYC here - Whitman or Lincoln?
  • Lincoln, clarified to "as the president-elect"
  • "He recalled although breakfast was served, the family did not eat and "not a word was spoken all day"." I'd have written 'He recalled that although breakfast... Perhaps it's an AmEn/BrEn thing, or perhaps I'm just wrong, but please consider.
  • No, my brain definitely wants it to have that as well
  • "The poems were not revised substantially following their publication." I'm not clear what the reader is meant to understand by this - would we expect them to be revised substantially following publication? I assume I'm missing something?
  • Whitman was known to rewrite his poems a lot as he matured-- leaves of grass was published in many different editions throughout his life, with some poems added, some removed, some revised-- compare The Sleepers (poem), which had one of its major sections completely taken out. How the reader is supposed to know that, I have no idea :P. I've added a note-- does that help?
  • "Shortly before Whitman's death, he wrote a final poem with the president" Two things: First, consider using 'his' instead of 'Whitman's', since Whitman was named in the previous sentence, and nobody else has been yet. Second, we were told in the previous paragraph that 'This Dust was once a man' was his final poem on Lincoln - they can't both be the final one?
  • My fear for your first point is that the previous sentence says "on Lincoln's assassination" so people may assume that "his death" is Lincoln's... For your second point-- good catch! Whitman's only really known Lincoln poems are the four, removed description of "this dust" as the last one
  • Good point on the first point - that's fine
  • "Whitman, by then in failing health, presented himself as neglected, unfairly criticized, and deserving of pity in the form of financial aid." Where did he present himself like this - was it in the book, the New York Sun, or was it a more general thing?
  • Yeah, my understanding of the story is that's the general "vibe" he sought to give off through most of his actions.
  • Bram Stoker and Walt Whitman together at last? Cool - we're getting into supergroup territory there, is there any more you can add? The discerning reader will want to know more!
  • Yes there totally is, in fact there's arguably enough coverage for GNG to be met about Walt Whitman and Bram Stoker, but I'm not convinced that it's actually directly relevant. Added a sentence or two
  • Looks good, thanks
  • Not a request for a change, but "Whitman had cleaned the "old channels of their filth"" - is that a 19th-C quote referring to Whitman with the pronoun 'their'? I'd be interested to find out more about that, but Google is just giving me snippets which are hard to attribute. I'd be grateful for more info to tuck away for the next time a troll starts shouting about gender-neutral language.
  • I think it's the channels themselves that had their filth cleared?
  • Ah, yes, that is the obvious reading now that you've pointed it out.
  • "The scholar Martha C. Nussbaum" Scholar is a bit vague - consider being more specific? (Our article says 'philosopher').
  • Sure
  • "The Chilean critic Armando Donoso [es] wrote Lincoln's death" Again, I'd have written 'wrote that Lincoln's death'.
  • added

That's it. Thanks for your work on this, it's a great read. Girth Summit (blether) 21:58, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support

[edit]

I've given so much input on this article that doing so again feels like significant over-kill. It’s sharply written with a clear focus and is judiciously supported with high-quality reliable sources. Eddie has done a good job on this one, a clear passion-project. It taught me a lot I didn't know. Support! — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 17:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by DMT

[edit]

"America's poet" gets 'Lincolnmania'. Interesting.

  • "Whitman's lectures on Lincoln's assassination bolstered Whitman's reputation..." → "Whitman's lectures on Lincoln's assassination bolstered his reputation...", flows better.
  • My thinking is that if phrased that way it could be interpreted to mean 'lincoln's reputation' (his in this context is unclear)
  • Ah, astute observation. Maybe 'the poet' could work but it's not a huge problem
  • Good idea
  • "In 1856, Whitman wrote a lengthy description of his ideal president, described by Whitman biographer Justin Kaplan as a "Lincolnesque figure". Whitman desired a "heroic" figure, cunning and bold in temperament and knowledgeable about the world" → "In 1856, Whitman wrote a lengthy description of his ideal president, cunning and bold in temperament and knowledgeable about the world; a "Lincolnesque figure", said Whitman biographer Justin Kaplan." Truncated for better readability and varied, less rigid, prose.
  • Adopted somewhat revised version, I want to keep "heroic" as it's the main summation and "according to Kaplan" flows better, imo.
  • "He greatly admired the president, writing in October that year, "I love the President personally." - This seems redundant. Prose-wise: the word admiration has been around the block a couple of times already and onwards; I elect that the subsequent usage be replaced with reverence, veneration...etc. But this line simply repeats past info. How about merging it with the first mention: "Whitman immediately liked Lincoln, and his admiration of the president steadily grew in the following years—once expressing personal love for him"?
" moved the quote, though I want to keep it as a quote because it's clearer to go with what Whitman says.
  • Amanda Gailey's a scholar of...? Literature, poetry, Americana, presidents, civil war...? Best to clarify to avoid the dreaded weasel words.
  • English professor, linked.
  • If this inquiry has no definitive answer don't fret, but is there a reason as to why the two outliers were excluded? If so, it could be worth mentioning.
  • I couldn't find them. And I looked everywhere. Vendler is a very good scholar, but not so good at specifically referencing-- she likes to have general references
  • "their filth" - Of the presidents or Whitman's peers - or others? Worth a clarification.
  • His old channels
  • Charles M. Oliver - same with Gailey, recommend noting their discipline.
  • AmLit-- he's also published on hemingway
  • "generally considered having..." → "generally considered to have...", I initially thought the current standing to be grammatically incorrect - best nip other's thinking similarly in the bud.
  • done
  • Why is "hastily" inconsistently placed in quotation marks? It's used throughout in the same context.
  • removed
  • Peter J. Bellis - same with Oliver and Gailey.
  • English Prof
  • They're good. I appreciate that you retain a vision whilst taking the suggestions into consideration.
Spotchecks
[edit]

Sources checked are good and accurate. Slight issue - more inquiry - below but otherwise all's well. DMT Biscuit (talk) 20:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Whitman noticed the president-elect's "striking appearance" and "unpretentious dignity", and trusted Lincoln's "supernatural tact" and "idiomatic Western genius"." - The text is supported by the citations, chiefly Eiselein (1998). Is Griffin (2014) incorrectly placed here or am I, most likely, a fool?
  • "Whitman considered himself and Lincoln to be "afloat in the same stream" and "rooted in the same ground"' - The same case as above; the text is accurate but seemingly the citations have an uninvited and empty-handed guest.
  • ditto

Source review - pass

[edit]

Will do shortly. Hog Farm Talk 22:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are all reliable and formatted correctly. The breadth of sourcing used is a representative range of the sourcing on this topic. In addition to the spot checks conducted above, I checked a couple of other refs as well and detected no issues. Pass on sourcing. Hog Farm Talk 05:06, 2 September 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/Walt_Whitman_and_Abraham_Lincoln/archive1&oldid=1042629767"