Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/USS Congress (1799)/archive1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Moved resolved comments

[edit]
Consistency, citations ending with fullstops or not.
Please explain this.
" Roosevelt 1882, Chapter II " but yet " "Essex". Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships. Navy Department, Naval History & Heritage Command. Retrieved 2 September 2009. "
I still don't understand. Only thing that comes to mind is that DANFS references are using {{cite DANFS}} --Brad (talk) 05:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I feel like an ass for not explaining adequately. At the end of your citations, some citations end with a full stop. Some citations do not end with a full stop. Perhaps all citations should end with a full-stop? "Roosevelt, (1883), Chapter II." instead of "Roosevelt, (1883), Chapter II" Fifelfoo (talk) 06:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not being familiar with the term "full stop" I assume now that you meant adding a period (.) at the end of each reference. I have done this. --Brad (talk) 05:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Australian English :). Fifelfoo (talk) 05:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency, commas after year (see fn15) 03:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Fixed.
Bibliography consistency: locations for all publishers please. Peter Fenelon Collier is sufficiently obscure to me as a late 19th century publisher that I'd like a location. 03:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Fixed.
Provenance data: publisher and location: Roosevelt, Theodore (1882). The Naval War of 1812 or The History of the United States Navy during the Last War with Great Britain. OCLC 133902576.Fifelfoo (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the Gutenberg edition of the book does not supply location or publisher. --Brad (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Urgh. Give us two ticks. Gutenberg says 3rd ed 1883. let me correct it. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected, correct text cites. Beautiful. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've made a style decision to not bracket years in notes, but bracket them in the bibliography, consider consistency. (This is only a for consideration item).
I've added the brackets. If cite book uses them it's probably a good idea for all. --Brad (talk) 05:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For consideration only: citation of Roosevelt using ¶n notation form of the citation location within the text for further detail. Or ¶ beginning "On that day..." form. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This Roosevelt book is beginning to annoy me. I may go out and find a version that I can cite page numbers to which are also missing from the G'berg text. --Brad (talk) 05:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes... Gutenberg promises alot... and fails to deliver in a number of key areas. Modern editions are available 2nd hand for under USD10 online. Fifelfoo (talk) 06:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found a google public domain book to substitute. It's the same edition as the G'berg book but supplies everything needed for good references. At all times I strive to use references on my articles that are either public domain or online; or both. --Brad (talk) 05:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It might be public domain for you... my version shows snippets only :). Its a great instinct. Fifelfoo (talk) 05:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support related comment 1c. Sourcing issues already adequately explained at previous reviews.Fifelfoo (talk) 02:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Date consistency checked. Consistently D Month YYYY or appropriate subsets (Month. D Month. Month YYYY). Fifelfoo (talk) 02:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from main page

[edit]
  • Comment. Alt text done; thanks. Alt text is present (thanks) but needs work. "A ship at sail" is too terse. I suggest mentioning the number and types of masts and/or sails and/or decks, the U.S. flag flying, and any other details that jump out at you and can easily be confirmed by a non-expert. The alt text "John Rodgers in his naval uniform" is both too terse (it says little of what Rodgers looks like) and contains the unnecessary phrase "John Rodgers" (this should be removed as being both repetitive with the caption and unverifiable by an expert looking only at the image). Please see Wikipedia:Alternative text for images#Portraits for advice about alt text for that portrait. Eubulides (talk) 21:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fifelfoo fixed the John Rodgers alt. I'm going to wait on the infobox pic until it's decided if it should stay or not. --Brad (talk) 10:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It's been ten days now, and the infobox pic is still there. Assuming it'll stay, can someone please add alt text for it? Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 18:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has been completed. --Brad (talk) 05:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good; thanks again. Eubulides (talk) 05:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - Image copyrights check out. Awadewit (talk) 01:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/USS_Congress_(1799)/archive1&oldid=1137412043"