Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George S. Patton slapping incidents/archive1

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 GrahamColm 10:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

George S. Patton slapping incidents

Featured article candidates/George S. Patton slapping incidents/archive1

Nominator(s): —Ed!^(talk) 12:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article provides an in-depth insight into World War II U.S. military politics at the highest level. It's passed GA and a MILHIST A-class review. —Ed!^(talk) 12:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Ed!. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and images - spotchecks not done

Compare author punctuation for Garland and Nimmo
- I don't see a difference between them. —Ed!^(talk) 23:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Omar_Bradley,_official_military_photo,_1949.JPEG: source link would not open
- Replaced that image. —Ed!^(talk) 23:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Wounded-on_wayto-hospital-RG-208-AA-158-A-015.jpg: should use creation/publication rather than upload date, and does this have an archive number? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed the image. I've continually had problems with that image. It's a popular one but I simply cannot find a source to properly cite it. —Ed!^(talk) 23:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - What are you talking about? You know exactly where it is: Record Group 208 (Records of the Office of War Information) Entry 158 at College Park, MD. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It's a very nice article. It looks complete and well-referenced.
"In spite of Patton's effectiveness, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the commander of the Sicily operation and Patton's friend and commanding officer, had long noted Patton's colorful leadership style also meant he was prone to impulsiveness and a lack of self-restraint" needs a "that". It's also kind of long and snaky.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Those who ware not willing to fight will be tried by court-martial for cowardice in the face of the enemy." -> "Those who are..."
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"In the U.S. Army for eight months, Kuhl had been attached to the 1st Infantry Division since 2 June 1943" looks awkward
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"...diagnosed with Malarial parasites..." Lose the capital.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"However, Arnest also sent the report through medical channels..." Is this "however" really necessary?
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The last paragraph needs work. We should avoid saying "in reality". --John (talk) 09:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1a: The article is well-written overall. A few concerns:

Should the dates follow American formatting since the subject is tied to that particular country?

My understanding is MILMOS applies since Patton is notable exclusively in his military exploits. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We mention how much destruction Patton's forces caused in Sicily, but is it worth mentioning what he lost (troops, vehicles)?

Done. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This phrase seems odd: "Patton created a larger-than-life personality" Do you really "create" a personality?

In this case, I think so. As is in the Patton article, his personality was mostly artificial. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How was Eisenhower's noting of Patton's colorful leadership style "in spite" of his effectiveness? The "however" that begins the following sentence suggests contrast but, to what?

Removed. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation should not be inside quotation marks unless it's part of the quoted material (Battle fatigue section, para 1 & 3; 3 August section, para 1, possibly elsewhere). See WP:LQ.

Checked the sources. In both instances, the punctuation is as used. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1b: The article seems to be comprehensive.
1c: I did note that a book named Patton: Ordeal and Triumph by Ladislas Farago seems to be well-regarded and makes several mentions of these incidents. Since the majority of your information seems to be from the Axelrod and Blumenson books, did you consider the Farago book for additional insight?

It didn't have a ton more to add so I figured it wouldn't need to be included. —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1d: No POV or neutrality issues.
1e: The articles seems stable.
2a: The lead summarizes the article content appropriately.
2b: The structure and headings are appropriate.
2c: The citation style is good.
3: The licensing on the included images is good; each photo is in the public domain.
4: The article is of appropriate length.

Very cool article and an interesting read. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 23:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking it over! —Ed!^(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reviewed this article at A class and believe that it meets the FAC criteria. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. My comments were addressed, and I think it's ready for FA status. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 22:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~

This could be better phrased, IMO: halted as other officers such as Omar Bradley surpassed him in command Perhaps, "halted as former subordinates such as Omar Bradley became his superior officer" or some such.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 14:54, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No other issues. Nicely done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for taking another look! —Ed!^(talk) 14:54, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.