Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Robert Kaske/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 29 August 2021 [1].

Robert Kaske

edit
Nominator(s): Usernameunique (talk) 06:58, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On a bomb-shattered Pacific island in the waning days of World War II, Robert Kaske read a story about two professors so engrossed in their conversation that by the time dusk turned to dawn, they had forgotten where they were. The story led Kaske to abandon his intentions of a business career; he instead made his way to Cornell and founded one of the preeminent medieval studies graduate programs in North America, credited with producing the backbone of the discipline's next scholastic generation.

This article began as a stub intended to give context to the author of a source cited in another article, then quickly grew. It is well-written (if I do say so myself), comprehensive, and thoroughly researched. Significant effort went to tracking down source material—be it Kaske's short stories published as a student, or even the 1974 photo used in the article, provided by the photographer from the original negative. The article reviewed a thorough good-article review in May by Chiswick Chap, and is ready to be nominated here. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:58, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Hawkeye7

edit

How unusual to see and article on an academic. Have written many myself, but in general don't take them to featured. Article is in good shape; some suggestions:

  • Suggest linking sophomore, junior, senior, Jesuit, magna cum laude, Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, PhD
    • Done.
  • "the school newspaper" The Xavier University Newswire?
  • World War II: the narrative is a bit jumbled chronologically here, and might give the reader the impression that he returned from the Pacific before the war ended. The 819th Tank Destroyer Battalion departed San Francisco for Hawaii in March 1944, and went to Peleliu in February 1945. You can read more about its history here
  • I thought about using that source, but wasn't sure about it, given that the source and author are unclear. It might be the same source noted in a footnote to Kaske's Festschrift, which says "The Modern Military Field Brance of the Military Archives Division of the National Archives and Records Administration provided a brief 'History of the 819th Tank Destroyer Battalion' and some other material concerning the 819th." --Usernameunique (talk) 06:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we add the title of the PhD to article and the infobox? (Military service can also be added to the infobox using the module parameter with infobox military person)
  • Done. Also trying to pin down the end date of Kaske's service (1945 or 1946), and a good source showing his promotion to First Lieutenant. Oddly, Find a Grave seems to have found a source for the latter, but I can't figure out where that site got it from. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we know the name of his PhD supervisor?
  • Add df=y to the infobox date parameters to harmonize the article's date format
    • Done.
  • I think "Pennsylvanua" is a mispelling
    • Fixed.
  • Is Winston (Wink) Locklair really likely to get an article in the future?
  • "Carol Vonckx, an English scholar who herself became a professor at Cornell" Yeah, in 1992.
    • She was teaching at Cornell since 1963 but only became a full professor in 1992.[2] In the meantime she may have been an associate, assistant professor etc. In American academia all ranks of professor are called "professor", and full professor is the highest rank at many institutions. (t · c) buidhe 23:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Well she was lucky to get a job at all, given Cornell's anti-nepotism rules. I suspect that her career progression was slow. But she was a renaissance historian, not a medievalist. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All good. Great work here. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Hawkeye7. A couple responses above if you're interested. In response to your first comment, there are a couple other articles on academics I've brought here, e.g., Caroline Brady (philologist) and John Richard Clark Hall, and a couple others probably in the pipeline—mostly ones (like Kaske) of authors I cited and created a stub about, then went back to build out. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Kaiser matias

edit

I'll go through this in the next day. Looks like a neat article so far. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC) Comments below:[reply]

  • "straight-A student in high school" just in consideration for our non-North American audience, would it be better to use something like "top student" or something like that? I'm not opposed to the wording as is, just thinking out loud here.
  • "He was commissioned a second lieutenant even before graduation..." This comes out of nowhere, so it may be worth noting the year he started his studies at Xavier, so give context, especially as the dates of his MA and PhD are listed shortly after. I'd also drop the "even" here, as it seems superfluous.
  • In the "Early life and education" section, is it necessary to link Latin? Seems like a common enough thing to leave out.
  • "won the Latin contest" Is it "the" Latin contest, or "a" Latin contest? The former suggests to me that it's the definitive test out there, which I don't think is the case here. I'd lean towards using "a", or a qualifier ("won the school's Latin contest", for example).
  • Per the source, "The achievements of young Robert during his high school and university years are better documented [than his early years]. He attended Elder High School, an all-male institution established in 1923 as the first of Cincinnati's interparochial high schools. In a curriculum not overburdened with frills, he completed four years of English, Latin, and religion without a grade below A, worked on the school newspaper and the yearbook, won the Latin contest, and played baseball." I assume the author got the information from the school yearbook, which I haven't yet been able to find a copy of. I've gone with your approach of saying he "won the school's Latin contest". --Usernameunique (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1938 Kaske also matriculated at Xavier University..." I don't think the "also" is appropriate here. I get why it's used, but think you could reword it to simply say something like "After graduating from Elder High, Kaske matriculated at Xavier University. The year is implied that way, and it flows neater, to me at least.
  • "the name of the column meant 'So what?'" Should qualify it meant "So What?" in Latin.
  • "During a leave ... he took out a marriage license, served as a best man at a Thanksgiving wedding the next day in Cleburne, Texas, and married in January." This is a little unclear to me. From what I understand he took out a marriage license to get married himself, then served as a best man on the day after Thanksgiving (Black Friday, to be anachronistic), and then had wedding in January. Is that accurate? I'll wait to hear back before looking at ways to clear it up.
  • That's pretty much what it meant (although I had meant the first wedding was on Thanksgiving itself, not Black Friday), but looking at the sources again, I see that I mistakenly dated the first wedding by the date of the newspaper article, not by the date referred to in the article. I've now reworded the sentence to "During a leave at the end of 1943, while stationed at Fort Hood, he served as a best man at a wedding in Cleburne, Texas, took out his own marriage license a week later, and married in January." --Usernameunique (talk) 00:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Kaske left Washington University in 1957..." Was this due to his contract expiring, or some other reason? Curious if it can be clarified, but I understand if that's not possible.
  • The sources tend to glance over this period, and don't discuss the reasons for his leaving. My guess, given Kaske's subsequent jumping around and his comment about publishing himself out of paradise at UNC, was by 1957 he had established some bona fides, and figured he could move up the academic ladder and/or head to a place with a more established program. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "'Parris Island of medieval studies'": Having done graduate studies in history (albeit more modern, and more interdisciplinary), I can sympathize with that description for his program. That sounds intense, though I can see how it led to such a strong crop of future scholars.
  • The publications section is quite lengthy, so I wonder if it would not be worth splitting that off into a stand-alone article/list (something like Bibliography of Robert Kaske?) In place leave the summary that's there, but as it stands the publications take up roughly two-thirds of the page on my computer, which is excessive.
  • The bibliography of a scholar would seem to fit naturally into his biography. His Festschrift, after all, includes both. And given that dozens of his works are cited throughout the article, it would be a bit of a messy divide; dozens of works would be listed in both this article and the standalone bibliography. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overall a solid article, and you do a good job of showing how Kaske impacted the academic world, which can of course be a challenge. I don't see anything major to address here, so look forward to giving it a final review, and likely support. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much for the thoughtful comments, Kaiser matias. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Happy with the replies above. Still think the sources could go in it's own article, but I'm not going to hold it against the article, and appreciate your viewpoint on it. Happy to support a well-written article. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

edit

Spotchecks not done. Version reviewed

  • "Kaske, standing, discussing his paper which won seventh place in a 1942 intercollegiate writing contest" - this contradicts what is stated in the source
  • There are two sources (newspaper and yearbook) here. The yearbook writes that Host Robert E. Kaske, editor of the "Athenaeum" and Lawrence Splain, editor of the "News," won sixth and fifth places respectively in the Intercollegiate English Contest. The newspaper article writes that Two Xavier University undergraduates won sixth and seventh places in an intercollegiate writing contest open to students in Jesuit colleges and universities of the Missouri and Chicago provinces, contest judges in St. Louis informed Rev. John J. Benson, dean of the Liberal Arts College, yesterday. Lawrence L. Splain, 5709 Doerger Lane, Cincinnati, a junior, won sixth place. Robert E. Kaske, 4216 St. martin Street, Cheviot, was awarded seventh. I went with the newspaper's description of things given that it is closer in time to the contest, but have amended to account for the contradiction. --Usernameunique (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in how locations are formatted
  • This isn't done consistently - for example Chapel Hill has a larger population than Urbana, but the former includes state and the latter does not
  • Fn2: Simian is the publisher, not work title. Ditto FN123, check for others
  • Multiple pages should use "pp", and be consistent in whether ranges are abbreviated
  • How are you ordering Bibliography?
  • Locations and publishers are included whenever possible (and I've added one in response to this comment), although at times the journal does not make this clear. Journal of the Rocky Mountain Medieval and Renaissance Association says it is printed at Brigham Young University, for instance, without making clear whether it considers Provo, Utah to be the journal's location. And then Old English Newsletter is "Published for The Old English Division of the Modern Language Association of America by The Center for Medieval And Early Renaissance Studies, SUNY-Binghamton", leaving it unclear as to which one to use. --Usernameunique (talk) 09:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Nikkimaria. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 09:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Z1720

edit

I agree with Kaiser matias above that his publications should spinout into their own article. WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY says "If an article already exists on an author or artist, then a separate article for a list of that person's works...is warranted if the list becomes so long that its inclusion in the main article would be unsuitable." I believe it has reached this threshold, as it takes up a large portion of the article. It is expected that an academic will have a large body of publications, especially an important academic in their field like Kaske. This large list makes it difficult for the reader to know which of his works are the most noteworthy and notable. Other FAs on prolific writers, such as Maya Angelou and Lilias Armstrong, have split off their published works. Caroline Brady (philologist) does not split off her works, but she only has 17 works listed, while Kaske's article has much more than 17. I suggest that this section is split into its own article. Then, in a "Selected works" section we can hatnote his list of publications and include his most important works (and works mentioned in the article) in a shorter list. Z1720 (talk) 15:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the relevant guideline, "Lists of published works should be included for authors", and "Complete lists of works ... are encouraged, particularly when such lists are not already freely available on the internet." The only other list of Kaske's publications (which is mostly, but not entirely, complete) is contained within his Festschrift, an out-of-print book from 1986. So it is clear that Kaske's works should be listed—the only question is where.
The guideline does not suggest what it means for a list of publications to be so long that it is "unsuitable" for inclusion within the article on the author. Z1720, your concern is that the list makes it difficult for a reader to discern which works are the most notable. But a significant number are, such that there would be little to whittle down. As one colleague observed, "Given that Kaske published no other book and that his list of other publications weighs in at about sixty items, including eleven book reviews, some not well acquainted with the scope of his work might ask why he enjoyed such enormous prestige. ... The answer to the query is relatively simple. First, so many of his articles, even the shorter ones, were seminal studies". (Sowell 1989, p. 119.) And it is unclear how to do the whittling without engaging in guesswork or original research. The best we can do is to mention the articles that people writing about Kaske themselves mentioned. This is done is the first paragraph of "Publications", which guides the reader "to know which of his works are the most noteworthy and notable".
Finally, a note about length. The article on Caroline Brady lists 17 publications, because 17 publications is all she wrote; had she written more, I would have included them. The article on John Richard Clark Hall lists 25 publications, because 25 publications is all he wrote (well, that I could find). For the same reason, the article on Herbert Maryon lists 49 publications. Kaske, for his part, published 65 books, chapters, articles, and reviews. It's not that much more, and given that dozens of his works are cited in the article, not many could be removed. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I remain unconvinced by the arguments presented here and to other editors above and below me. The articles that were given as examples to justify including more works (Hall and Maryon) both have less works listed than this article, and Maryon was one editor opposed for the length of the published works by one editor, and another recommended the the list be spun out. My biggest thought about this list is an adage that "If everything is special, nothing is special". In other words, if everything is listed, then nothing is important enough for the reader to know about. My recommendation is that any works talked about in the article prose should be listed in a Selected Works sections, and everything else can be placed in a separate "List of" article. Z1720 (talk) 19:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, Z1720, I still think that it is appropriate to keep the list of publications in the main article. But reasonable minds may differ, of course, and there is no obviously correct approach here—which is well evidenced by the fact that you began with one suggested approach, then switched to another. As said below, keeping all publications here is "not unreasonable", and that should be enough.
I do wish to correct a significant misreading of the Maryon nomination. No editor ever opposed that nomination due to his list of works. One editor offered an unrelated oppose—due solely to the many citations once used in the lead—and then struck it once the citations were removed. Separately, the same editor sought to clarify that the nomination could not be used to justify the inclusion of "hundreds of entries" in a list of publications—the example there being James F. Leckman and his 473 publications. Happily, however, we are not even close to that point. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HF

edit

Will review this one. Hog Farm Talk 03:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "and joined The Traditionists, which that year devoted their meetings to reading Dante's Inferno" - what were the Traditionalists? a literary club?
  • Note 4: the storm trooper link - how did you determine the link should go to the WWI unit, rather than the Nazi Sturmabteilung (sometimes referred to as the "Nazi Storm Troopers")? The quote is late enough it could refer to either
  • It seems weird to me to have note 6 talking about him returning to UNC placed before where it is mentioned that he left UNC
  • Note 7 seems trivial, I'm not sure that it's needed
  • I could be convinced to take it out, but thought it was fun and interesting. Keep in mind, the source's author (Thomas D. Hill, a colleague of Kaske at Cornell) thought it relevant to include the story to illustrate the point he was making about Kaske's impressive library. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I really don't think that the full length of publications is something that should be displayed here. Recommend splitting off to Robert Kaske bibliography or some variant of that title.
  • Responded above. As to your below points, I'm not sure that the percentage of the article's length that the list of publications takes up is really relevant—it's no longer than the "References" section, after all, and long references sections don't get moved to separate articles. And as for the Quid Ergo articles, the relevant guideline (quoted above) recommends including them, and a dozen are cited in the article as it is. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:32, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's it from me. The major sticking point for me is the long list of publications that takes up more space on the page than the article itself should be split off to a subarticle. I agree with Kaiser Matias and Z1720 on this. The long list of every Quid Ergo? article written by him is especially bloating here. Recommending keeping the introduction and the most important items, and then splitting off and pointing to there with the {{main}} template. Hog Farm Talk 05:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Hog Farm. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - I'm still not 100% sold on having the bibliography here, but it's also not unreasonable, and I have no quibbles with the rest of this. Hog Farm Talk 00:16, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Minor comment from Chidgk1

As non-academics might not understand consider simplifying "and frequently constituted seminal studies" as it is in the lead. Perhaps "and were often very influential".

  • (Additional comment)

Additionally, if you liked this comment, or are looking for an article to review I have one at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Greenhouse_gas_emissions_by_Turkey Chidgk1 (talk) 15:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from TRM

edit
  • "of medieval literature. Kaske spent most of his career at Cornell University, " He spent. And where is Cornell?
  • "where he was ... where he founded ..." bit repetitive.
  • "Cornell alum" alumnus?
  • "1964–89" other year range in infobox uses full year, be consistent.
  • "Catholic school, for elementary school" repetitive, why not "a Catholic elementary school"?
  • "Quid Ergo?"[18][17] " order.
  • "the Masque Society" what was that?
  • "that year,[31][32][33][34]" four cites needed for this one fact?
  • Each source has unique information. The first announces the production and contains details of it, the second includes a photograph of Kaske and gives his part, the third is a review of the play, and the fourth is Kaske's own take on the script. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:34, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not necessarily. The purpose of citations, according to WP:WHYCITE, is not only to "enable users to verify that the information given is supported by reliable sources," but also to "help users find additional information on the subject". The four cites used here accomplish both purposes. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "magna cum laude" link.
  • Link furlough.
  • "married in January" seems odd to say this here but wait until a lot later before re-visiting and telling us who he married.
  • "But the leave was short and in 1945" not sure why "But the leave was short" is relevant? 1945 was a whole year after he got married...
  • Added info from the source mentioned by Hawkeye7, which shows that Kaske, after getting married in January 1944, left the States in March. (His time at home was probably even shorter than that, given that he was stationed in Texas and California, yet got married in Ohio.) "But the leave was short" is relevant because it underscores how short Kaske's honeymoon period was, and foreshadows the end of the marriage (see "the war left him little time for domesticity" in the "Personal life" section). --Usernameunique (talk) 02:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "at Xavier Kaske" comma after Xavier.
  • " bomb-shattered Pacific island" tone issues.
  • What's the issue with it? It closely mirrors the source ("At the end of the war, filling empty time on a bomb-shattered coral island in the Pacific, Lt. Kaske read a story about two professors who talked the night away."), and is a nice turn of phrase. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:52, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "aided by the G.I. Bill, Kaske" for us non-experts, this needs a touch of explanation.
  • " Tavern,[60][28] " order.
  • "student paper, Factotum,[61][62][63] " three cites needed for this one fact?
  • "Kaske might have become a Renaissance scholar" who is speculating this?
  • Emerson Brown, the former student mentioned elsewhere. Per the source, "At Chapel Hill, Robert Kaske nearly betrayed his Traditionist legacy by becoming a Renaissance scholar. Under Hardin Craig's direction, he wrote his master's thesis on Chapman's tragedies; and had Craig remained at Chapel Hill, Kaske might well have continued to work with him." Do you think we need to clarify who said this? --Usernameunique (talk) 02:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "dissertation defense" is there a link for this?
  • "At Washington Kaske" comma after Washington.
  • "awarded a $600 research" inflate.
  • no need to italicise alma mater but you could link it.
  • "where on 1 September 1961 he" commas after where and 1961.
  • "salary of $13,000" inflate.
  • "In the fall of 1963 " avoid seasons for timeframes.
  • "America[98][58]—" order.
  • "which Fred C. Robinson said" who was he?
  • "teaching.[114][3][115][116] " order.
  • "wrote, "received most" this quote is huge and mainly factual. Does it all need to be a quote or can it be refactored into regular prose?
  • "The two had a son, David Louis.[127][128][58]" order but three cites for one fact?
  • Don't we normally put (div. 1958) for divorce in the infobox?
  • The source is a little fuzzy on these details—perhaps not surprisingly, given that it's a bio contained in a Festschrift. It simply says "Although he was married while home on a short leave, the war left him little time for domesticity. It was nearly four years before he could return to civilian life. ... In 1958, his first marriage over, he married Carol Vonckx of Elgin, Illinois." So it's most likely that the marriage ended in a divorce, but not expressly stated, and it's unclear when exactly the marriage was "over". --Usernameunique (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Cornell.[82][131][132][133]" four cites necessary?
  • "James;[134][58] at" order.
  • "on the 26th" ->"on 26 August"
  • "The Johns Hopkins Press." is linked plenty of times, (probably only needs linking first time) but some other publishers aren't linked at all. What's the strategy?
  • The strategy is to link specific presses and societies/associations when they have an article, but not institutions (e.g., when an entire university is given as the publisher). Gave it another look and added two links. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to $13,700 the" inflate.

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks as always, The Rambling Man. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man, further responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 09:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, all good, happy to support now. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:43, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

edit

Just FYI, I've noted the concerns, arguments, and counter-arguments re. the bibliography. I'll admit the list seems to me to overbalance the article somewhat, and might be preferable as a separate list article, but I don't think this is a reason to delay promotion. If further discussion on the talk page results in the list being moved, so be it -- the article's promotion to FA with the list intact doesn't preclude a move, nor should such a change invalidate the FAC result. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:56, 29 August 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Robert_Kaske/archive1&oldid=1041240726"