Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fort Dobbs (North Carolina)

Fort Dobbs (North Carolina)

This nomination predates the introduction in April 2014 of article-specific subpages for nominations and has been created from the edit history of Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the TFAR nomination of the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page unless you are renominating the article at TFAR. For renominations, please add {{collapse top|Previous nomination}} to the top of the discussion and {{collapse bottom}} at the bottom, then complete a new {{TFAR nom}} underneath.

The result was: scheduled for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 27, 2013 by Bencherlite ^Talk 15:14, 14 February 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Fort Dobbs was an 18th-century fort in the Yadkin–Pee Dee River Basin region of the Province of North Carolina, near what is now Statesville in Iredell County. Used for frontier defense during and after the French and Indian War, the fort was built to protect the British settlers of the western portion of what was then Rowan County from Cherokee, Catawba, Shawnee, Delaware and French raids into North Carolina. The fort's name honored Arthur Dobbs, the colonial Governor of North Carolina from 1754 to 1765. When in use, it was the only fort on the frontier between South Carolina and Virginia. On February 27, 1760, the fort was the site of an engagement between Cherokee warriors and provincial militia that ended in a victory for the militia. Fort Dobbs was abandoned after 1766, but archaeological work in the 20th century and historical research in 2005 and 2006 led to the discovery of the fort's exact location and probable appearance. The site on which the fort sat is now operated by North Carolina's Division of State Historic Sites and Properties as Fort Dobbs State Historic Site, and supporters of the site have developed plans for the fort's reconstruction.(Full article...)

Nominator comment: Promoted today (I don't think the bots have gotten around to doing their work, but see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/February 2013 for log. I think it's safely under 1,200 chars with spaces, and my points assessment as a newbie is that it's at 4 points as follows: 1 point - Date relevant to article topic (Feb 27 is the date of the Fort's only engagement); 1 point - The requestor is a significant contributor to the article, and has not previously had an article appear as Today's featured article; 2 points - A similar article has not been featured on the main page within 6 months (I checked: there are articles about castles, about battles in the 1600's and 1800's, etc.; I didn't see any French and Indian War, frontier fort, American colonial topics, etc. There were some historic buildings, but none that seemed similar to me). Cdtew (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Under the section "Decline and fall of Anglo-Cherokee relations" the lead sentence reads, "During the Anglo-Cherokee War, a theater contemporaneous with the later years of the French and Indian War..." Here the word "theater" is used incorrectly. A theater is a large area of military operations. It is a place, and not a time as suggested by the wording of the sentence. For instance, in the Seven Years' War two of the theaters of operation were the European Theater and the North American Theater (and in the latter theater, most Americans have named the conflict the French and Indian War). The easiest fix is to remove the word theater: "During the Anglo-Cherokee War, which occurred during the later years of the French and Indian War..." Sarnold17 (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done/Response You're right that it was used incorrectly. At some point, though, that became a compromise for a dispute involving how to fit this in with the larger F&I war, that somehow became the consensus and stuck. I've changed it to read as you suggest. It's tough, because it's not strictly a sub-conflict, as the Cherokee weren't per se on the side of the French, but it's related. Explaining that takes up too much room, though, so letting the reader figure that out is probably best. Cdtew (talk) 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. - Nice work! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. - A nice piece on pre-revolutionary N. America. Thanks for the good work. Sarnold17 (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]