Wikipedia:Featured article review/Execution by elephant/archive1

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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 9:59, 2 October 2021 (UTC) [1].

Execution by elephant

Notified: ChrisO~enwiki, Arildnordby, WP Death, WP India, WP Law, WP Classical Greece and Rome, [[WP Iran, WP Greece, WP Ottoman Empire, 11 August 2021

Review section

This one is a 2003 Brilliant Prose promotion delisted in 2004 for completion issues, then repromoted in 2006, and last formally reviewed in 2008. I don't think the sourcing is up to what we'd consider FA level now. The Sri Lanka section is sourced only to centuries-old traveler's tales. The practice appears to have been adopted in parts of the Muslim Middle East is supported only be a 12th-century travelogue. In addition, a number of weaker, older sources are used throughout from 3 Maccabees to Ibn Battuta. "Elephants are widely reported to have been used to carry out executions in Southeast Asia, and were used in Burma and Malaysia from the earliest historical times" is sourced to a source from the time of the British Raj. In addition, the map doesn't seem to entirely match what is described in the article. This one needs a complete overhaul. Hog Farm _Talk 05:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added a ref. But, the {{cn}} tag under Execution by elephant#Western empires must be resolved to retain status, and "appears to have been" and "widely reported" are {{whom}} territory. I agree with HF about the need for an overhaul. Narky Blert (talk) 22:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Fowler&fowler: Well let's see. Let's start with the page name. I should warn I might not get beyond it.

First: "Death/execution by elephant" seems to be missing the indefinite article, unless there was only one elephant in the Kingdom in which case it is lacking the definite.

Second It is not like "execution by poisoning," (i.e. ~ by the action of poison) where the verbal noun has some bearing on a bodily trauma. We don't call George Floyd's last moments "Death by Cop," any more than we do his ancestors' during the Reconstruction "Death by White."

Third: The elephant is merely the vehicle of human intent. We don't say X was executed by the executioner; we say X was executed by King Y the Terrible. We don't say, "Rape by Hugh Hefner's swimming pool." We name the human male perpetrators.

Fourth: Elephants are vegetarians. In the wild, they can act on a perceived threat by charging another animal, tossing, or stomping them. But they don't dismember another animal and stand around watching the blood gush. If you steal them from their mothers before they are weaned, and break them in using cruel punishments that only humans can devise, maybe they might do your bidding, but if it involves standing around in gore, I'd be dubious.

Fifth, what we have here are tall stories told by storytellers of the middle ages and passed on to credulous travelers. I don't have my mother's English literature books here; otherwise, I'd quote from John Mandeville.

Summing up. This is not an ethologist attempting to understand the stress caused to elephants in carrying out noxious orders under duress. It is taking the tales at their face value, the butt of the jokes being the elephant and the cultures of Asia. The most merciful thing you can do to this article is to remove the star quietly and let it wander off into the night. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've taken a quick look at the article. I don't know how much Robert Kerr had to drink before he wrote his memoir, but the King of Goa was sitting in Lisbon.

I forgot earlier that the elephant in India feared though it might be, is also a holy animal, associated with Lord Ganesha in the same way that a Gray langur is with Lord Hanuman. Elaborate Hindu funerals are held for both. In other words, it can't simply be an object of a baneful king's power because it is already one for the munificence of a divine being whose name Hindus take when they embark on any new undertaking. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC, accelerated process - As noted above by F&F, most of the sourcing here is crap, based on overly credulous traveler's tails. Most of this needs rewritten with actual academic sources. Hog Farm _Talk 03:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC; accelerated process, essentially per my talk-page notice. The sourcing is seriously lacking, and there are major original-research issues. The article would have to be rewritten from scratch to meet the criteria, and there's no sign that that will be happening anytime soon. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and original research. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:37, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delist, accelerated process per Fowler&fowler and Extraordinary Writ as this is largely a trainwreck. Hog Farm _Talk 14:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, accelerated process per Extraordinary Writ. (Off-topic, but ... I just realized that Ganesha, referred to above by me, an FA promoted in 2007, has had no reviews. It is a vital article. I'm not particularly familiar with the topic, but there is brain power on WP among editors who have edited it or others who have edited India-related articles on religion or art (users Redtigerxyz, Ms Sarah Welch, Johnbod, Kautilya3, Utcursh, Ceoil, ...) not to mention FAR regulars. I'm sure some sprucing up would be welcomed.) Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, accelerated process per above. Needs a rewrite from the ground up, and FARC isn't the place for that. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above. Article needs to be re-written to comply with current FA requirements, namely the "claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources" bit. RetiredDuke (talk) 10:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:59, 2 October 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.