Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Cooley

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 02:59, 8 October 2007.

William Cooley

I have been building this article slowly with great help from other editors. It has been promoted to A-Class and peer reviewed since that, and I would like to get the feedback from the community if it can be promoted to FA-Class. --Legionarius 02:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The lead is very brief and doesn't feel like it really tries to establish Cooley's notability to a reader who has never heard of him before. The lead also includes what looks like namingcruft. Isn't this really better off in the main body of the article or a footnote, or even removed altogether? Peter ^Isotalo 06:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully it is a little better now.--Legionarius 01:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. "Early life" feels a bit too brief to merit a separate section, though. Perhaps it could somehow be merged with the section below.

Peter ^Isotalo 06:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I joined the paragraphs and reading improved, even if the article has a looser structure. A worthy trade-off. Thoughts?--Legionarius 06:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say much about the content, but the prose in this article is not quite ready. Some sentences do not have parallel constructions, for instance:
- "Cooley sustained himself as a salvager and planting arrowroot"
- "Arrowroot was used to make bread dough and as a base for wafers and biscuits"
I found the use of the word "accumulating" surprising. It would typically be used as "accumulating a fortune". Hopefully, the time since last edit will allow enough distance for you to catch any other sentences like the above. Finally, galleries are somewhat discouraged, and it's not clear to me what these historical documents add to the article. You might want to drop the gallery and incorporate one or two of the images into the text. Gimmetrow 18:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery remopved. Unfortunately I am at a loss regarding prose, and I am asking for some help from the League of Copyeditors.--Legionarius 21:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try to do something about the prose issues I see in the next few days. Gimmetrow 23:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Legionarius 01:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the issues mentioned. Or at least I guess I did. :-)--Legionarius 23:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph of the lead repeats information that appears again in the fourth paragraph of the lead. Can this be reworked so it is not repetitive? Gimmetrow 02:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to include some information about the fact in the first paragraph to attest his notability and expand information on the third paragraph. Thanks for the copyediting!--Legionarius 05:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I am striking my oppose for now because I won't have time to do a thorough re-read for a little while, and I am happy with the other MOS changes that have been made so far. Karanacs 03:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Oppose for now. Karanacs 19:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Is it really necessary to specify that he is American in the first sentence of the lead? I'd take that out.~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~If the attack is known as the New River Massacre, I'd change the caption on the image to reflect that.~~ DoneI thought "Massacre" would compromise NPOV (at time Indians "massacred" people and White Settlers "attacked"), but it is a fact that it is how the attack is known.--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Need to use {{nowrap}} or a nonbreaking space (& nbsp;) with numbers and their qualifiers (27 years, 3 terms, etc).~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is the information about his prospective father printed in any secondary source? Per WP:OR, it is original research to go look at the censuses, etc and find the one man who might fit the bill as his father, and use only those primary sources in the article. Done There is no mention in secondary sources. It is not a "the one man who might fit the bill", but there is always some doubt involved. I removed the mention.--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Using the census as the only source for his birthdate may also be OR.~~ DoneAdded another ref.--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~With the exception of the various spellings of his name, in the body of the article please refer to him as Cooley and not "William Cooley".~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Twice in one paragraph you mention that he arrived in Florida in 1813; that is probably unnecessary duplication.~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:DASH; in many cases you use hyphens instead of ndashes and mdashes. Done Not sure if it is because of my keyboard they look the same, could you please be more specific?--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DASH. In many instances you are not to use the hyphen key on your keyboard but should instead type & ndash; or & mdash; to get the appropriate dash. Karanacs 14:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I failed to find an issue with the dashes in the article other than "present-day"; but this probably is my incompetence in understanding the policy. I listed all the suspects; could you please tell me where you see a problem in the occurrences below?

Hyphen

as his son-in-law.
..was twenty-seven by fourteen feet.
legislatively-appointed auctioneer.
present-day

Ndash

1783–1863

Mdash

Cooley moved away in 1823[3]—possibly to escape the Spanish influence—to the north bank of New River
Frankee Lewis—one of the first settlers, in the area since 1788[17]—sold her business...
...Indians in the area—arrowroot was a staple of their diet.
..good performance of his machinery—the output was close to 450 lb per day (204 kg per day)—brought Cooley..
...was a Captain of the "Silver Grays"—a militia for the home defense of Tampa in the 1850s.
--Legionarius 16:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you've got listed here looks correct, but when I go to edit the article it just looks like a hyphen (that may be my browser, and I am used to seeing the actual code & mdash;). The policy also applies to citations, unfortunately. Karanacs 14:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed it to your preferred coding, including citations.--Legionarius 16:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~be consistent with use of hypens; the article mentions a "ten year-old daughter and nine year old son"~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Don't use "the" in the name of headings~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Be sure that all full dates are wikilinked~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Need metric equivalents for some measurements (150 yds)~~ Done--Legionarius 21:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~There are a few more; I saw references to lbs but not kg and ft with no corresponding meters. Karanacs 14:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

hopefully they are all done now.--Legionarius 16:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did a little bit of copyediting, but there is a lot more. Ping me when the League of Copyeditors has looked at it (and when you've fixed the other issues) and I'll re-review. Doing... I am looking forward to have their assistance.--Legionarius 21:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Karanacs 19:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the League is overwhelmed now. Is there any particular area of the article you are specially dissatisfied? I saw that other users stopped by and made comprehensive and high-quality edits.--Legionarius 16:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Tony (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looks good now. Gimmetrow 02:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Excellent article and worthy of FA status. PeterSymonds 17:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.