Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 15:28, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• I've made a couple of revisions for the time being but with exam preps, an open PR and multiple FAC reviews to conclude, it's unlikely that I would be able to give a full review at present. I might return later, if I have the time. Good luck with the nomination. MSincccc (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Noleander

• Can the article clarify the distinction between these items:
  1. The TWA Hotel
  2. The headhouse building
  3. The 1960's TWA terminal ( headhouse plus which other buildings?)
  4. The TWA Flight Center (is this synonymous with the terminal?_

I feel like the readers might need a venn diagram to see how they inter-relate :-) If distinguishing these is not feasible in the Lead, consider adding several sentences somewhere, maybe a paragraph in the Architecture section?

That's a fair point. Basically:

• (1) uses both (2) and a new building.
• (4) is synonymous with (3), which used to encompass "flight wings" along with (2). Since the flight wings have been demolished, (4), (3), and (2) are all the same. (And yes, (4) and the term "Flight Center" are synonymous with the terminal. I've clarified this in the second sentence of the first paragraph, as well as in the second paragraph.) - EG

• Continuing the above: What parts of the FLight Center are not the headhouse? I read:
  • "The TWA Flight Center, designed by Eero Saarinen and his associates, is centered on a headhouse .."
  • "The building's main section, the headhouse... "
  • The TWA Hotel article says "TWA Hotel is a hotel ... It uses the head house of the TWA Flight Center... "

So if the headhouse is only part of the Flight Center, then what parts of the Flight Center are not the headhouse? Maybe it is stated further down in the article, but readers will want a summary of the major components/buildings very early.

I made it more clear that the flight wings were part of the terminal and have since been demolished. - EG

• Continuing above: "Two tube-shaped, red-carpeted departure and arrival corridors extended outward from the terminal and connected to detached structures known as "flight wings", which contained the gates." Can this be clarified: Is the "terminal" here the headhouse? This sentence suggests that the wings & passages & gates are not part of the terminal. But I've always seen the word "terminal" used to include the attached passages & gates.
  • I have reworded this. The flight wings were actually are part of the terminal. I've gone through the article and changed other instances of "terminal" to "headhouse" where only the headhouse is being mentioned. - EG

• Clarify: "... [its] thin-shell concrete roofs could not be built in other parts of New York City; ..." Can it directly state " ... due to building codes". I realize that is sort of revealed later, but readers would benefit from a more direct statement.
  • Done. - EG

• Metric? "... 200,000 square feet (19,000 m2)..." Metric is far more common in the world and even in the USA these days. Is there any way the article could present metric first, then imperial in parens? I"m sure all the sources about the 1960s construction use imperial, but it is 2026 now, and English WP has an international readership.
  • Per MOS:UNIT, "In non-scientific articles with strong ties to the United States, the primary units are US customary (pounds, miles, feet, inches, etc.)". Since this is a subject with strong ties to the US, and is not a scientific subject, I put the imperial first. The metric conversion is included in any case, but putting metric first in this article would seem to violate the MOS. - EG

• Are there any sources that discuss this building in popular culture? I'm certain I've seen it as a setting/backdrop somehere: Film? Advertising? TV shows?
  • Yes, this is mentioned in the "Awards and media" section. Strangely, I didn't find any sources that talked in depth about the terminal's appearances in popular culture, but I did find some scattered appearances here and there. However, per MOS:POPCULT I didn't mention these unless they were significant appearances (e.g. the terminal featured prominently in these media). - EG

• Better wording? TWA's advertising manager said the building was promoted "as though it were a national monument". The word "said" may suggest to readers it is a statement of fact; but it may be a bit of puffery, so maybe something like TWA's advertising manager said their approach to advertising was to treat the building "as though it were a national monument"."
  • Seems reasonable, I have done that. - EG

• The "Show Ref Check" tool says that book sources use the location/city attribute inconsistently: 3 have the location; 13 do not. E.g. this one includes location Eero Saarinen: an Architecture of Multiplicity. New York: Not a showstopper for FA, just FYI.
  • Removed all the locations - EG

• The headhouse sits at the middle of a curve in one of JFK Airport's service roads,... Consider "access road" since "service road" implies a small, rarely used road, used only for repairs.
  • And consider "enclosed by [or 'within'] a curved access road" rather than "at the middle" since the latter could mean it is positioned at the midpoint of a long, gradually curving road, whereas I think you're trying to emphasize that it is nestled within the loop of a tightly curved road.
    • Changed to "The headhouse sits on a curve in one of JFK Airport's service roads". It is technically on the midpoint of the curve, but I think that wording can cause confusion (as demonstrated by your comment above), as the headhouse is located on the convex (i.e. outer) side of the the curve. As for "service road", this is how access roads are referred to in the NYC region, but I have changed it to "access road". - EG

• Photo of a large man with hat and beard? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Central_View.jpg Not sure readers benefit from this: too many people obscuring the building. Black & white. Consider removing it to make room for other, more informative photos.
  • Swapped it with another image. - EG

• Can the article include a photo of one of Saarinen's buildings he designed before TWA? In other words, do any sources say something like "The TWA building was an evolution of his style, extending ideas he first introduced in his earlier Kresge Auditorium ..."? If so, readers would like to hear that.
  • To be honest, Kresge wasn't really a major building of his. The sources do not make any connection like the one you're suggesting. In fact, he mainly designed based on the needs of his clients at the time, rather than necessarily making successive improvements to his designs; as an example, just before designing TWA and Dulles, he had worked on five corporate campuses, only to never design any others. Aside from that, there isn't really a good place to put the image; Kresge is mentioned once in the "Impact" section and in a footnote. - EG

• Ditto for the Dulles International Airport Main Terminal ... if space & sources permit, a pic would be nice: Kresge -> TWA -> Dulles
  • I'll think about it, as Dulles is arguably more related to this design than Kresge (being one of the few other airport terminals he designed). However, as with the above, I'm not sure where in the article it would go. - EG

• Titles of sources use a mixture of title case & sentence case:
  • "Thin shell classic TWA structure gets new life"
  • "TWA to Unveil Spectacular N.Y. Flight Center Monday"

MOS says a consistent algorithm has to be used; and that the way a source capitalizes its own title should be ignored.

Fixed. - EG

• Copyright of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flight_Wing_No._1_-_Main_Floor_Plan_-_Trans_World_Airlines_Flight_Center,_John_F._Kennedy_International_Airport,_Jamaica_Bay,_Queens_(subdivision),_Queens_County,_NY_HABS_NY-6371_(sheet_22_of_32).png
  • If that is a photo of a diagram, then two license infos need to be supplied: (a) the drawer of the diagram; and (b) the photograhper that took a photo of the diagram. I only see (b) ["This file comes from the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS)..."], but I cannot find license for the underlying diagram/drawing. The license info in there now includes "...This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing." which I think is saying the same thing.
  • The license info says: "Beyer Blinder Belle Architects and Planners, creator" is that the drawer of the diagram? or the photographer?

• • Just as a note, in the "Permission" section, it says "This image or media file contains material based on a work of a National Park Service employee". The file itself, indeed, does indicate that the NPS drew this file directly, meaning the underlying file is public domain. Works created by those in their official capacity as a US government worker are automatically PD.
    I'm not sure what Beyer Blinder Belle's involvement is, exactly. This is a scan of a file, and if they scanned the file, they cannot claim copyright over it because scans are entirely derivative and introduce no new content. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• Thanks for the initial comments. I've addressed or replied to them above. Epicgenius (talk) 03:38, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• The interior was modeled next; since the space was to be symmetrical, Saarinen & Associates only created drawings for half the interior.... studied the models throughout the night, crawling across them. - Not clear if this passage is describing 2D drawings ("drawings", "crawling across them") or 3D structures ("modeled"). Do the sources specify?
  • I've changed the wording. I didn't realize that the word "modeled" could be read as "physically modeled". - EG
• ... which Ringli said was part of Aline's efforts to ... I'd forgotten (or skipped) the place where Aline was identified, so I was lost here. Is there a way to remind the reader who she is in this sentence? Either "his wife" or "Saarinen's wife" or "Aline Saarinen" or something?
  • Aline B. Saarinen is linked earlier; I spelled out her full name at first mention. Since this is in the section immediately preceding this one, I decided not to spell out her full name again, but happy to hear an alternative perspective on this. - EG
• 14 engineers and 150 artisans "artisans" is an unusual word to use for the US construction industry. To me the word conveys an artist or craftsperson that works on decorations and is skilled in things like sculpture, carving, stained glass, etc. I suppose there could be 150 such artisans, but that seems high. On the other hand, there may have been 500 construction workers and 150 artisans working on decorations. Can "artisans" be defined or wikilinked here?
  • Changed to "150 skilled craftspeople". - EG
• ... one-eighth of the airline's passengers criticized the design of the temporary structure. The roof was poured as a single form starting on ... Some readers may think "The roof" was the roof of the temporary structure since they are adjacent in the text. If the roof was for the other (new) building consider adding a word to clarify.
  • Changed to "The permanent structure's roof" - EG
• It had been finished after most of the other major ... Grammar could perhaps be simpler ("had been" is annoying) e.g. It was completed/finished after ...
  • Done (I used "finished" because the previous sentence uses "completed"). - EG
• Image caption: Union News restaurants coffee shop by Raymond Loewy Can it clarify what Loewy's role was? Interior designer? Chef? Photogapher of this pic?
  • I clarified Loewy's role in the project; he designed three of the upper-floor spaces. - EG
• Two towers, flanking the headhouse's sunken lounge, curve around the original headhouse. These towers were constructed as part of the TWA Hotel, which has 512 guest room - Article should ideally tell the reader what Hotel facilities the headhouse contains: rooms? Reception? Restaurant(s)? I'm guessing no rooms, but that should be made explicit.
  • It already was made explicit (in the first paragraph of the "Headhouse" section"). I also added that restaurants and the hotel's reception desk are there. - EG
• Explain: According to Saarinen associate Kevin Roche, Saarinen had thought the TWA tract "was the best site", despite airline officials' dissatisfaction with the lot. This makes it sound like the airport provided TWA with multiple possible sites, and TWA told Saarinen to choose one. If so that should be stated, because normally airports are so tight on space (and they have a master plan) so they would tell the airline: "here is where you must build your terminal". So, if the airport did give TWA 2 or more sites to choose from, readers will want to know that because it is a bit surprising.
  • They were assigned that site, same as in a regular master plan. TWA didn't like it, but Saarinen did. - EG
• I ran the tool User:Alaexis/AI Source Verification which tries to validate all citations using AI. It was pretty slow, but by the time it got halfway thru, most cites were "not accessible"; a bunch were "validated", many were "partially validated". One failed validation, but it said that "only 10% of that source was accessible" so I'm not sure how it could draw a conclusion. Overall: it didn't find any solid source-to-text failures.
  • I ran that tool too, and would not put too much stock in it. For example, one of the issues it raised was that "it does not mention 'closed-circuit television,' 'a central public address system,' 'a schedule board,' or 'baggage scales'", even though the source did mention these things. - EG
• As such, the designation did not preserve the TWA Flight Center from modifications, a major point of contention when the building's redevelopment was proposed in the 2000s. That paragraph is well-written, but ends on a cliffhanger: readers will want to know if the changes to the building in the 2000s (for TWA hotel etc) violated the intent/spirit of the LPC designation; or did the 2000s changes respect the intent/spirit of the designation.
  • The 2000s renovations didn't really change much, though this source says that the New York State Historic Preservation Office (a state agency) was consulted, so I would assume they conformed to the spirit of the designation. As for the 2010s changes, this source says that the developers consulted with nearly two dozen government agencies (already mentioned in the article).This source more explicitly states that the renovation team has consulted with the LPC regarding these changes "and will continue to work closely with these parties throughout construction". - EG
• Compass: In its reports about the TWA Flight Center head house, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission uses modified cardinal directions for convenience. In this article, the precise cardinal directions are used. Readers may be confused by "modified cardinal direction" ... I'd never heard that term before, and I consider myself an amateur geographer. I finally figured it out by reading the source: For the sake of convenience, north is used in the description rather than northeast, and so on. Consider making the footnote clearer with something like In its reports about the TWA Flight Center head house, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission used approximate compass directions for convenience. In this article, precise compass directions are used.
  • Thanks for pointing this out. I have rephrased this. Epicgenius (talk) 15:30, 19 April 2026 (UTC)
• Some of the older photographs of interiors are muddy & dark, especially in shadows. That's a shame, because it is such a beautiful building. I'm pretty sure it is not my computer or eyeballs, since most other images in other articles appear fine. MOS:IMAGES specifically permits enhancement of brightness & saturation of older photos (to a small degree), provided it is not so extensive as to misrepresent the original. Consider brightening the following so readers can appreciate details in the shadows:
  1. The terminal was ranked on the 2007 List of America's Favorite Architecture.
  2. The architect Robert A. M. Stern called the headhouse a symbolic "Grand Central of the jet age".
  3. Departures board in the headhouse [this one really needs it]
  4. The headhouse under construction (exterior image, muddy shadows)

I'd be happy to help with enhancement, if you want.

If you could help out, that would be great. We have a ton of good images on Commons already, so if the pics need to be swapped out, we can do that as well. Epicgenius (talk) 15:33, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

• Accessibility: Images contain Alt text; no color-coding is used to convey information.

• Prose: overall, the prose is professional quality, and meets FACR requirements.

• MOS: The article and its cites conform to MOS expectations.

• Images: are relevant and informative. I have not done a copyright check.

• That is all for now. Noleander (talk) 00:47, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for the very detailed review, I appreciate it. I've replied to the concerns you've raised above. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:34, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review by JacobTheRox

• All 11 images are in the public domain because they were produced by in-service navy officials.
• The last image hangs over into the next column for me, which then makes the table thin. Consider adding a {{clear}}.

• I removed the last image, it didn't seem to be adding much.

• All captions correctly formatted
• Correct grammar in alt text "An aircraft carrier at sea with both aircraft elevators are depressed."
• No other issues I can find
• Image review is a  Pass

Other comments by JacobTheRox

• Currently your end has:

Lvl2 "Notes"

Lvl2 "References"

Lvl2 "Sources"

Lvl3 "Online sources"

Lvl3 "Bibliography"

Semi-colon "Military documents"

This makes no sense to me – the use of a semi-colon as a section header is proscribed and if bibliography is for books, shouldn't it be its own lvl3 anyway? And why is it called "bibliography" while only including books, not "Book sources" to match the other headings?

• The cost is only in the infobox; please add it to the actual prose itself. I would also add {{inflation}} with it so we know how much it is today.
• That is all for now, I look forward to hearing your response.
• P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC at the moment; please do consider dropping by!

Should all be resolved, I'll get around to your FAC ~soon. Stikkyy (talk) 18:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Whonting

Hi Roy, not sure if I will do a full review, but have run this through User:Alaexis/AI Source Verification, which picked up the following:

• "The track was produced by Shintaro Yasuda and Skylar Mones" - it is unclear from the sources whether either were acting in their capacity as producer or merely composer.
• "as well as the International Music Video title at the 2023 BreakTudo Awards in Brazil." - 2024 Awards

Some other points that catch my eye:

• Language that can be read as promotional includes "revealed"
• "Publications such as the Philippine Daily Inquirer's American bureau and SunStar Cebu have praised the video for its depictions of Filipino culture." ambiguous from your writing whether they were praising the video for depicting Filipino culture or the method of depiction.
• the Bini members decided to sing the track a capella. → the Bini members sang the track a capella.

Good luck with the nomination! Whonting (talk) 07:29, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Whonting! Thanks for your review!

• "The track was produced by Shintaro Yasuda and Skylar Mones" - it is unclear from the sources whether either were acting in their capacity as producer or merely composer
  • they are both producer and songwriter.
• "as well as the International Music Video title at the 2023 BreakTudo Awards in Brazil." - 2024 Awards Done
• Language that can be read as promotional includes "revealed" Done
• "Publications such as the Philippine Daily Inquirer's American bureau and SunStar Cebu have praised the video for its depictions of Filipino culture." ambiguous from your writing whether they were praising the video for depicting Filipino culture or the method of depiction Done
• the Bini members decided to sing the track a capella. → the Bini members sang the track a capella. Done.

ROY is WAR Talk! 10:08, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Roy for getting on these quickly. Can you move a source inline explicitly saying they are producers on the song? Whonting (talk) 10:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Whonting: on ref 8: They collaborated closely with renowned producers Skylar Mones and Shintaro Yasuda, known for their work with international stars as well as K-pop icons. Also, in their apple music credits which is reliable too. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:42, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Whonting!

Just an update, if you are done here? If yes, please add if you are support or oppose. Thanks! ROY is WAR Talk! 11:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Nick-D

This isn't a topic I'm at all familiar with, but here goes:

• The background section needs a paragraph or two more clear explaining this band's career up to the release of the song.
• The information on who wrote the song in the 'Composition and lyrics' section is confusing.
• Can more be said about the song's lyrics? This would work best as a separate paragraph, but needs a bit more material.
• "It was included to be part of a then-upcoming album" - bit over-complex
• " He wrote that the song's musical direction diverged from Bini's typical style" - if this is the case, the article doesn't cover it.
  • Comment not addressed. I note that the band's most popular songs on Spotify are largely sung in Filipino, but all lyrics for this song are in English (sung with a distinct US accents). Is this part of the new direction? Was this song an attempt to break into the American market? Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
• Can anything be said about the song's commercial performance and profile outside of the Philippines?
• "Its sets have been described" - this is confusing: was the video shot in part of a city or on a set?
  • Comment not addressed Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
• "The video also depicts a typical morning scene in the Philippines" - from having just watched the video, an obvious issue is that many of the people in the clip appear to be white North Americans. Do any sources cover this? (it was presumably done to broaden the appeal of the video to western markets).
• The 'In popular culture' section seems to really be about covers.
  • Comment not addressed Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
• Also from having listened to the song, it's very over-produced and the band sings with strong North American English accents. Do any sources discuss this?
• Only one of the current six notes is referenced; they all need to be. Nick-D (talk) 00:36, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Nick-D! Thanks for your review!

It's all Done except for this:

• I added the forbes here. Although, WP:FORBESCON is unreliable, however, Jeff Benjamin have published many reliable source such as Billboard, Rolling Stone etc. So, it wouldn't hurt the references, i guess?

• That seems OK in this context Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• from having just watched the video, an obvious issue is that many of the people in the clip appear to be white North Americans. Do any sources cover this? (it was presumably done to broaden the appeal of the video to western markets).
  • Unfortunately, I search on this and I can't find on this specific. But, maybe in the future someone cover on this. :)
• The background section needs a paragraph or two more clear explaining this band's career up to the release of the song
  • I added a bit on the most important 'cause some of the news in June 2024 are just trivial, so it's not really worth it to add.
    • The material here remains inadequate. Remember that FAs need to largely stand alone. I know nothing about this band, and the section isn't helping me to understand it. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
• Can anything be said about the song's commercial performance and profile outside of the Philippines?
  • Unfortunately, none. Tho, the listicles on the international media outlets and "In popular culture" helped too.

• • Why not? Commercial charts are readily available online for various countries and this can be checked. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Let me know if there's anything to do. ROY is WAR Talk! 11:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Further comments:

• "widespread critical acclaim, although a few reviews have acknowledged that its sound has divided Bini's fans" - the grammar is off here
  • Drive-by comment from Nineteen Ninety-Four guy: Each claim is unreferenced and unsubstantiated in its appropriate section in the body, as well. "Widespread critical acclaim" is such a strong claim that has to be backed by reliable, high quality sources explicitly stating this; citing listicles (which are hardly arbiters of critical consensus) and a measley five positive reviews to support this claim doesn't give the article a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature (as per criterion 1c). Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 04:59, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
• "On June 16, Bini surpassed Taylor Swift" - it should be specified more clearly that this is only in a narrow way given this is quite a broad statement. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I added that part, not the nominator. All of the review sources have "Generally reliable" consensus, so I figured it was safe to say, but I still removed it. :) Very easy fix. (And two of the listicles used are purely dedicated to Bini's music, so I hope my revision is okay now.) ~2026-20515-51 (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 06:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

PharyngealImplosive7

Marking my spot, will get to this if I have any free time – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

@Nineteen Ninety-Four guy: Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 06:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

• File:Death Race 2 Unrated cover.png - Fair Use
• File:Luke Goss 2011 (cropped).jpg - CC BY 3.0, source link is dead and needs an archive link
• File:AV0A6306 Sean Bean.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Roel Reiné Flying.jpg - Fair Use
• File:Foreshore Freeway Bridge cropped.jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:Mustang-IMG 2284.JPG - CC BY-SA 2.0 ca
• All of the images have alt-text for accessibility, are relevant to the article, and have proper captioning.
  • Just need the one comment to be addressed!
    • Arconning, thanks for the image review. Archive link has been added. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

  Pass! Arconning (talk) 06:30, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Whonting

Hi Relayed, I'll have a look over. Whonting (talk) 13:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

• In the lyrics, the narrator discusses his struggles and desire to become a better version of himself while upholding self-integrity and determination. Why while? These are surely not incompatible with becoming a better version of himself?
• Can you introduce Alanshiii?

Unfortunately, there's not much info about Alanshiii himself, so I couldn't really introduce him deeply in the article. Sources just introduce him as the director of the video. What I know is, if I'm not mistaken, Alanshiii is a stage name for "Alan Montales Ante Jr." (based on his socials) and is probably associated with the production company 1032 Lab. Before "Dam", he directed the video for "Kalakal", if you want me to mention that instead. – R

• Some POV language throughout, e.g. production quality, The EP explored genres, revealing that now they have. Can you work on some more impartial language?
• most-viewed music videos on YouTube I presume?

Done: Yes, that would be correct. I have revised the prose to make it clearer. – R

• The prose in Composition and lyrics is rather choppy, you can do a better job of allowing the sentences to flow. Which is a bit strange, I quite like your prose in the lead.
• I don't understand how "Dam" is wordplay from pakiramdam

"Dam" was derived from pakiramdam; sources have stated that "'Dam' is a play on the word pakiramdam." SB19 is known for using words for its titles that wouldn't really mean by its literal dictionary per se, like "Mapa" (Though it's English literal equivalent is a "map", its deeper meaning is apparently a mashup of mama and papa) or "Gento". Let me know if there are any changes you would suggest to move forward. – R

I still don't quite understand. Ed is derived from Edward, that doesn't make it "wordplay". Wordplay has an element of wit. What is witty about shortening pakiramdam to dam? - Whonting

• Musically, "Dam" is characterized as primarily a powerful anthemic hip-hop track wordy and vague, who is characterizing it as such? Whether it is powerful is an opinion, and likewise for anthemic ("rousing or uplifting")
• alluding to the band's experiences throughout their career vague and should be attributed... I will revisit this section once rewritten. The same issues persist.
• I have now looked through the reception section. None of the "track reviews" are from music critics, and they cannot be taken as music criticism. Their opinions are undue and should not be included. I believe the same for Rome Saenz, though I am open to being wrong if you can provide an instance of him writing a critical review of music for Billboard Phillipines.

Thanks for pointing that out. Unfortunately, full-on critiques/criticisms that rip each part of the song or any art in general are almost non-existent in the Philippine media, hence why that's the case. Although there are some notable exceptions, like the film Maid in Malacañang, it's still almost non-existent beyond that. Some journalists are aware of this ( ), apparently the reason behind that "is to give local talent some much-needed support and encouragement. We all think the industry needs all the help it can get," attributing it to the PH music industry not being as established as the West. So, most articles often send praises rather than criticisms.

Although Rolling Stone Philippines was recently established in the country, music criticism is not widespread there either, nor have they made a critique of "Dam". They would often review international releases rather than local ones. From what I can see, you can count on your fingers how many they did on a Filipino act, and most of them are non-mainstream artists. Other than that, the closest critics we have perhaps are social media users on X.

For the "Critical reception" section in the article, I mapped it out based on another FA Freedom (concert). Let me know if there's something you want me to do regarding this to move forward. – R

This is a really interesting response, thankyou for sharing it. I have also read the pieces you linked, which were troubling, -- I didn't know how bad the situation in the Phillipines was.

At this article at this time there are two problems with the sourcing: non-music critics who are being represented as music critics (a WP:TSI problem, an example being the GMA Integrated News writer who is not a critic and does not claim to be), and music critics who are (it seems) unwilling to offer criticism, making their praise meaningless. We don't have to agree on the second justifying removal to agree that the first certainly does.

On the second, critics who seem unwilling to criticise, I don't see how they can be high-quality reliable sources for the purpose of FA. Whether they should be included on Wikipedia as a general matter, if we can't find evidence they are willing to critically review songs by Filipino artists, at FA they certainly should go.

That's where I'm at now, I'm very interested to hear if you agree or disagree. I opened up a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Task force Philippine Music on this topic, I'm sorry for singling you out but I think you know it's not a problem particularly to your editing or this article. Whonting (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

That's fine, and thank you, Whonting, for bringing this to our attention. I'll get to that topic soon. About the GMA Integrated News "review", I did go ahead and remove it as suggested. Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:41, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

• Looking at the sources for "commercial success", they are too effusive for such a judgement to be put in wikivoice. Simply list the facts.

Relayed, I'll pause here so you can address these points. The changes to critical reception should be reflected in the lead. Whonting (talk) 13:48, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Whonting! Thank you for taking your time to look at the article! I'll let you know once I've fully addressed your concerns. Relayed (talk • contribs) 14:33, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Relayed, looking forward to it. Jo-Jo Eumerus, pinging you as an FYI to the above comments on sourcing since you were the source reviewer for Gento (song) where these were not flagged as issues. Whonting (talk) 04:36, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Whonting! I'm sorry for taking so long. Although I'm not yet done addressing everything, I did leave some comments above, especially answers to some of your queries to clear things up. I'll let you know once again if I'm done addressing the rest. Regards, Relayed (talk • contribs) 14:54, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Relayed, I have left a response above. Whonting (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

This is where my relatively limited knowledge of pop culture sources showed, evidently. One thing to consider about reviews is that since they give opinion, the criteria for their inclusion is to a large degree whether they are prominent enough. Anyhow, looking up Pauline Miranda sounds like she doesn't write much on music. Hidzir Junaini and Rome Saenz meanwhile do. Alwin Ignacio and Kristofer Purnell one could go either way. Kristine Kang I can't find much on - which is probably a strike against her inclusion. That's for citing their opinions; whether they are reliable sources for facts would be a different question, although I generally assume that prominent reviewers would be called out if they got facts wrong frequently. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus, no, thankyou for doing it in the first place. I agree with you on prominence, though my point is less concerned with prominence (these are all established outlets after all), but whether we can take these to be sincere opinions of reviewers.

One distinction we can draw with these sources is "song is released, check it out" stories (e.g. at NME ) vs "this is a review" stories (e.g. still at NME for the same song ). Note that the second is an example of critical reception and the first is not, writing in different mediums and to a degree for different audiences (fans vs prospective listeners). Whonting (talk) 10:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Whonting: I get what you mean, but unfortunately, as I explained above, the PH media hasn't been investing in music review stories, which is quite a bummer because I would rather read something that goes deeper into the songs than just mere shallow statements of what it is. I just tried my best to get through with what I could work with, which I did by looking for somewhat subjective/opinionated statements in their news stories, then piecing them all together. That's kinda how I ended up with something like what I've written in the article. Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

@Relayed: Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

• File:Dam by SB19 cover art.jpg - Fair use
• File:SB19 on stage at the Pagtatag! World Tour, 2023 (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:SB19 - Dam (music video screenshot).jpg - Fair use
• File:SB19 performing Dam at the Bench Body of Work (cropped).png - CC BY 2.0
• Most of the images have alt-text besides the music video image, that needs to be fixed.
• All of the images are relevant to the article, under proper licensing, and have proper captioning.
  • Just the one comment!

Hi, Arconning! Thank you for doing an image review! I'll let you know if I've made the edits. Relayed (talk • contribs) 09:54, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, once again, Arconning! I have added an alt-text for the music video photo ("Refer to caption", since I believe caption itself is descriptive enough) as per MOS:ALTINCAPTION. Let me know if you have anything else. Relayed (talk • contribs) 15:05, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Pass. Arconning (talk) 17:03, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for being here, Arconning! Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

11WB

Support by Nick-D

This is a very interesting article, especially as it provides a snapshot of the military forces and personnel that built and sustained the British Empire (and without glamorising them). I have only the following comments:

• "and was afterwards posted on garrison duty across the British Empire" - was Glyn moved around as part of this? There's currently no details on how or when he went from India to Malta

There's a history of the regiment from 1892 that I had originally discounted because of its age and being written by its own officers but I think it should be OK for detail on its postings which I can't source elsewhere. Added some info, including an interesting snippet of service during the Fenian Rising.

• "across the border in nearby Spain" - 'nearby' doesn't seem necessary

Removed

• "Chelmsford was concerned about the forces of two Zulu chiefs, Matshana kaMondisa of the Sithole clan and Matshana kaSitshakuza of the Mchunu clan, who he thought were gathering a force" - repetition of 'force' in the same sentence

Good spot, removed "the forces of", which I didn't think was necessary

• "outbreak of disease" - can you say what disease(s)?

Added - Dumelow (talk) 11:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• "By the end of April, Glyn was at Dundee" - specify that this is the town in South Africa rather than the much better known one in Scotland.

Good point, added ", Natal"

• Do we know when/if Glyn recovered from his depression following Isandlwana? The first para of the 'second invasion' section suggests he was still not fully effective as a military commander.

I don't think so but I can't find too much commentary on his behaviour during the second invasion, I assume he sort of slotted back into a subordinate role under Chelmsford without a great deal to do. Greaves (2012) has "Glyn never recovered from losing his regiment at Isandlwana" and Greaves & Knight (2006) on his retirement has "a sad and stooped little man, Glyn's remaining years were overshadowed by the memory of his lost family on the rocky slopes of Isandlwana". I've summarised in the article as "In retirement Glyn lived in Mortimer Common in Berkshire, his final years were gloomy, haunted by the memory of Isandlwana." but happy to hear suggestion - Dumelow (talk) 12:06, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• "Glyn was promoted to major-general on 30 September 1882" - no duties associated with this are noted: was it essentially an honorific?

I've not been able to find anything he did in this period. I don't know if he perhaps remained on half pay and it was granted as a means of boosting his pension - Dumelow (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Do any sources discuss Glyn as a person during the last decades of his life in the UK? It must have been a significant change returning to the country after living for most of his life overseas. Nick-D (talk) 01:09, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Not much, except or the comments noted above about the memories of Isandlwana - Dumelow (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the review Nick-D, I've made some replies above and will come back on the rest once I've checked the relevant sources - Dumelow (talk) 12:41, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Nick-D, I think I have come back on everything above now - Dumelow (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Support Those changes look good, and I'm happy to support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 07:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

AA

*Putting a placeholder here. I'll review over the coming days. AA (talk) 20:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
Lead

• To avoid ambiguity in the lead, could "general rank" perhaps be linked to his substantiative rank?

Early career

• Is there any information on how or where he was educated?
• Two uses of "with his regiment" in consecutive sentences. Could this be reworded to avoid repetition?
• The mention of the burial of his sons on Malta is quite sudden, and prior to this there is no mention of their deaths. Might it be possible to introduce this to the reader in a sentence or two before, briefly describing how they died?

Cape Colony

• "and led expeditions that lasted up to ten days at a time" → "and led expeditions lasting up to ten days at a time"

9th Cape Frontier War

• Nothing to add here. Can't see any standout issues with structure or grammar. The section adequately and concisely details Glyn's role in the war.

Anglo-Zulu War

• Link Baron Chelmsford to Viscount Chelmsford.
• "...gave Glyn command of his No. 3 Column." Could "his" be dropped here? No worries if not, might be the proper military lingo!

First invasion

• "On 24 January the Natal Native Contingent at the post mutinied." The NNC abbreviation can be used here.
• "Effete" is a very niche word, I wonder if linking it to the Wiktionary definition might be beneficial? (wiktionary:effete).

Second invasion

• 2 → two, per WP:MOS.
• "Glyn had returned to Natal by 26 August..." not sure "had" is needed here.

Later career and death

• "In retirement Glyn lived in Mortimer Common in Berkshire, his final years were gloomy, haunted by the memory of Isandlwana". This might be better served with a semicolon after "Berkshire".
• Do we know when he moved just over the county border to Hampshire?

Footnotes

• Some brilliant footnotes here, that would be useful for several of my Hampshire cricketers who purchased commissions!
• Could the equivalents be updated to 2026 values?

References

• Ref 19 needs a Wayback Machine archive link.

Bibliography

• Bruce and Paton et al. need |via=Internet Archive adding to them, plus |url-access=registration.

Categories

• As comprehensive as they can be! I have added Category:Burials in Surrey.

Images

• File:Richard Thomas Glyn.jpg needs |alt= added to the infobox.
• All other images used in the main body need |alt= added as well.
• Fair use rationale seems to check out for all the images used, with appropriate tags.

@Dumelow: Please find my review above. An interesting read and a rather tragic man. It would seem toward the end of his career, the bad things that had happened to him began to overwhelm him, with his "survivors" guilt from his absence at Isandlwana tipping him over the edge. AA (talk) 12:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review by JacobTheRox

• Feel free to disagree with my comments as always
• File:Diadoch.png
  • Public domain by author's release.
  • The caption should have some kind of punctuation regarding the {{circa}}, probably either A map of the territories of the Diadochi, c. 303 BC or A map of the territories of the Diadochi (c. 303 BC)
    • Added
• Is there no other image you could include? The fact there's only a map leaves an interesting article otherwise a bit... bland. I can't see any on commons; are there no diagrams of city layouts or contemporaneous maps or depictions of leaders that are in the public domain?
  • Unfortunately (because we don't know where the city is) I can't put any pictures of ruins or layouts. We don't have any definite images of Antigonus I either. I suppose it could have an image of Seleucus, or Seleucia Pieria where its inhabitants were deported to. What do you think? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

  How about a multiple image of Lysimachus and Seleucus I Nicator either at the start of "Fall" or the paragraph before? Putting some faces to people is always nice in a history article. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 14:51, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

  Done with pleasure. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

  Brilliant. Image review is a  Pass then; I eagerly await the source review. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:42, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comments from Noleander

• Wording: "Seleucus ensured Antigoneia's erasure by transferring its population to his own foundations at Seleucia Pieria and Antioch..." The word "foundations" caught me off guard. To my USA ears, foundation as a noun means a building support or a charity. I suppose here it means "a city that Seleucus founded"? Consider re-wording so more readers get the gist.

• I see that the word is also used here: "... through settlement foundation. It was natural that occupying Antigoneia would not fully suit his purposes—founding a new city and destroying the previous foundation would be far more prestigious. Seleucus may have considered his defeated enemy's choice of location to his own at Antioch, which had a superior water supply, was situated in more fertile lands, and was closer to the sea. Legends of Antioch's foundation record that ..." The 1st and 3rd usages here are sorta verb-ish, and make sense. The middle usage is a concrete or rock structure that a building rests upon (to my ears :-) Noleander (talk) 23:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

  Hi Noleander! The term "foundation" is, as you note, somewhat antiquated, with the study of the foundations of Alexander the Great dating almost as far back to the time of the American Founding Fathers. The meaning is the same for both cities and America—it is the first establishment that is being referred to. Unfortunately, the term is now so intimately associated with the topic area (besides having a meaning, relating to the very initial decision and acts to establish a city, which is not quite replicated by any other word) that I think removing it in the first instance would be a mistake, but I have rephrased the second. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 11:41, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
• As an initial comment, I would suggest adding the relevant language template ("Use... English"). MSincccc (talk) 12:09, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Done MSincccc. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:14, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Description

• We could link to administrative centre on first mention.
• A series of wars soon broke out among them Do we need "soon"?
• His authority over the region was however not recognised How about His authority over the region, however, was not recognised ? MSincccc (talk) 12:14, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Done the first; I think the others are better unchanged. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:14, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

A.Cython

• Support: As a GA reviewer. While no drastic changes since the GA review, overall it has been improved in the right direction. Good luck!A.Cython(talk) 02:35, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Drive by

• All online sources should have archives, some of them do not.
• Instead of using the url "illawarramercury.com.au." use the name of the website/company.
• A lot of the things in the website parameters can be wikilinked.
• None of the images have alt text.

Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 00:43, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! I've fixed the URL title for that reference and added alt text to all images. I've run the ArchiveBot several times but it's left some references without archives; do I manually find and add them? And what do you mean by website parameters? Is this the wiki pages for the references? SnowyRiver28 (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, you can go to https://web.archive.org/ and use the wayback machine to manually get the url and dates for each one IAbot didn't get; it might help (if you use Chrome) to install the Wayback Machine extension to speed up the process. What I meant by website parameters was going back into references and finding the |website=The Sydney Morning Herald and turning it into |website=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]], doing so for all of them that don't already have it. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 01:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I've added archives for all sources that can be archived and wikilinked each publisher. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

• Don't use fixed px size

• File:Vincent_Stanford_mugshot_2016.jpg is mistagged. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, both fixed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 08:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from JacobTheRox

• Feel free to disagree with my comments and sorry if I've repeated any from above.
• The paragraphs in the lead are 3 sentences each and in my opinion are quite short for FA; I think more detail could be added or it converted to two longer paragraphs.

I've expanded the lead with more info, it's now four paragraphs. Let me know if you think this enough or more is needed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Fix cite order to [1][5] not [5][1]
• The source does not bring light to the fact that Stanford's upbringing was normal in light of his father's having left them, so I would say the current wording could be seen as OR. I would suggest you remove "Despite his father abandoning the family"

Agreed and removed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• "Stanford's flouting of rules was a clear "red flag" – is there more detail as to what he had done earlier, and if so, why the company don't think it was a concern? Did they ever know?

Added detail on the rules he was given and broke. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Fix cite order to [8][10] not [10][8]
• Fix cite order to [8][12] not [12][8]
• Add comma after "later that evening,"

All citations above and below fixed and comma added. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Fix disambiguation link to ute – I'm also unsure what this means, which would help if I could hover over a bluelink

Sorry, I should've caught that it was a disambig link when I added it as per a previous suggestion here. Fixed SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• As the quote from the tape is multiple short sentences it would be clearer to put "in a videotaped police interview" beforehand.

Fixed SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Is it known where in the quite graphic sequence of his crime at what point she was actually dead? If not that might be worth mentioning and if so please add it in the right place

Yes, it's in the court judgement. I've added it to the appropriate place. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• The plural of medium is media, not mediums.

Fixed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Fix cite order to [8][21][22] not [21][8][22]
• "One day before what would have been Scott's 28th birthday" – does the alignment with her birthday add encyclopaedic value; if it is merely for the emotional touch it should not be included.

Agreed and removed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• The article is missing a reactions section; surely this was brought to national attention and relevant people commented, both when she went missing and during/after the trial.
• The article is well written and most my comments are just prose suggestions but I feel like it lacks the depth of an FA. I read Disappearance of Natalee Holloway and Soham murders, the former of which is FA, and they seem much more detailed and encyclopaedic. I think there is definitely FA potential but I'm not ready to support at this point. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:56, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• P.S. My own article is on FAC here if you are interested in dropping by!

Copyvio from Watagwaan

Hello, I hope all is well! This is just a quick look on Copyvio to save some time down the line.

• Copyvio score is 26.5%, which is pretty good! The majority stems from the Sydney Morning Herald source (This one: ^[1]) although I'm pretty positive this is just of similar words used in both articles. There's only so many words you can use.

Will probably look into the article more later! For now, take care! I hope this goes on to become featured. Watagwaan (talk) 03:56, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Volcanoguy

Hello there! Thought I'd take a look at this since I have an open FAC of my own.

Is there any information about Scott's life prior to her murder? Birth year, education, etc.

Scott's disappearance sparked a large search effort, involving local police, SES volunteers, local sporting clubs and members of the wider Riverina community.[5][3] – The citations are out of order.

Overall, the article seems well-written, comprehensive and well-researched. Volcanoguy 15:38, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look. I’ve fixed the citation order and I’ll endeavour to find some more info on Scott and add it to the background when I get the chance. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 03:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Background

• then studied art upon her return
  • Do we need "upon her return"?
    • Removed. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• Maryon exhibited little if at all after 1912.
  • How about "Maryon exhibited little after 1912"?
    • The "if at all" is to point out that she may have had no exhibitions at all after that time; there are none that I'm aware of. --18:50, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• for the first time, in Germany.
  • You could drop the comma after "time"?
    • Revised to in 1912 travelled to Germany to meet the anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner for the first time. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• In 1914, she travelled to Dornach
  • You could drop the frontal comma after "1914" since it's British English.
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 08:43, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Description

• None for now.

Themes

• was made around the same time and was perhaps larger
  • Could the repetition of was be avoided?
    • Dropped the second. --18:52, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• this intimate rendering indicates there was a close relationship or at the very least an understanding
  • How about "at least" in place of "at the very least"?
    • This is from a direct quotation, else I would agree. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Themes

• represents a fifth-category work by Maryon
  • What does "fifth-category" work mean in this context?
    • These are outlined in the background section on Maryon: These works, according to her biographer Rex Raab [de], tended to fall into five categories: first, the world of external physical being; second, references to the elemental world; third, motifs from the spiritual world; fourth, spiritual–allegorical works; and fifth, a combination of emotional and spiritual aspects. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
• Another such example is Maryon's 1911 work
  • You could drop "such".
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
• According to Dreweatts, while writing about The Dance of Anitra, "While there is little
  • Could we avoid the first "while" since it occurs in the quote?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:39, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
• These had their genesis in a relief created by Maryon
  • How about These originated in a relief created by Maryon, perhaps in early 1919, depicting
  • Also, you could link to relief.
    • Done (on both counts). --Usernameunique (talk) 16:41, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 16:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks very much, MSincccc. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

• The other, titled The Passing of Winter—Miss Maude Allan as Spring, was made around the same time and perhaps larger; it was pictured in Academy Architecture in 1909,[77][78] and exhibited at the Forty-first Autumn Exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery from 23 September 1911 to 6 January 1912, priced at £200 (equivalent to £28,000 in 2024[a]).
  • This one could be split. MSincccc (talk) 08:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
    • The reason for the semicolon is because the second part is about the date of exhibition (1909; 1911–1912), which supports where the first part says was made around the same time. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Provenance

• termed the work "graceful"
  • How about A review in The Era described the work as "graceful" ?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
• A column published in the Acton Gazette and Middlesex County Times
  • We could drop "published".
    • You're right, that's better. Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:40, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
• although it did not sell during the exhibition.
  • How about dropping "during the exhibition"?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
• The International Studio printed a photograph of the statuette
  • How is it different from "publishing" a photograph?
    • None that I can think of. Changed to "published". --Usernameunique (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• by the English artist Edith Maryon.
  • Maryon's Wikipedia article describes her as a "sculptor". Could we make it so here as well?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:07, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
• Like The Dance of Anitra, these translated the grace and lightness of dance to the sculptural form.
  • How about "into the sculptural form"?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
• Lead seems to be lesser than 400 words, even though I bet it's well more than 300. No issues with it though.

MSincccc (talk) 11:52, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

After another read of the body

• with the former exhibition held during the summer and the latter during the autumn
  • How about "with the former exhibition held in the summer and the latter in the autumn"?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
• resolved to centre the anthroposophical movement, and build the Goetheanum as
  • Do we need the comma after "and"?
    • Removed. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
• among other works and contributions while there
  • Do we need both "works" and "contributions" or am I mistaken in thinking both are the same?
    • "Works" was supposed to refer to art and "contributions" to intellectual input, but I suppose the latter can cover both. Removed the former.
• and Panama, and back.
  • How about "and Panama, before returning"?
    • Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
• The performance facilitated an introduction to Alfred Butt, the manager of London's Palace Theatre, which in turn facilitated a two-week residency there.
  • We could avoid repeating "facilitated".
    • That's an intentional choice to highlight the line of events, but if it seems clunky I can take it out. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
• as she performs the seductive dance which emphasises
  • "which" → "that" (defining clause)
    • Agreed, but this is part of a quotation. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:28, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 10:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• That's all from me. I've made a couple of minor revisions; the rest of the article is fine as it is. Hence, I will support the nomination. Good luck. MSincccc (talk) 06:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

  Thank very much, MSincccc. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Noleander

• Overall, the aesthetics of the article are nice: good images; good section sizes.

• Clarify: "...the sculpture represents a fifth-category work by Maryon..." can the article define "fifth-category work"?

• This is in the background section on Maryon: These works, according to her biographer Rex Raab [de], tended to fall into five categories: first, the world of external physical being; second, references to the elemental world; third, motifs from the spiritual world; fourth, spiritual–allegorical works; and fifth, a combination of emotional and spiritual aspects. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Wording: "As termed by Dreweatts, it represents Maryon's ..." "Termed" doesn't seem ideal there.

• Now To Dreweatts, ... --Usernameunique (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Image copyrights? I'm not a copyright expert, but I notice that images such as this one have a single license from the photographer. Don't images of sculptures also require a free-to-use explanation for the artwork itself? I have seen photos of modern sculptures in Wikipedia, but they are always outdoor sculptures, and those Commons pages always have two free-to-use statements: (a) the photographer's license; and (b) the panorama law of the country, which typically states that images of outdoor buildings & sculptures are free-to-use. But those panorama laws would not apply to a small indoor sculpture like this one. This sculpture may be out of copyright because of its age, but that still needs to be stated in the Commons data.
  • This same issue applies to most of the sculpture images in the article.
    • Added the additional template "PD-art-70-3d" to these. Maryon died in 1924 (102 years ago), and the sculpture was published in The Studio and The International Studio in 1911, so it's well out of copyright. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Alt text: WP:ALT requires the alt text to be worded in a way that visually-impaired users can use screen-reading apps, and the alt text describes the visual content. The Alt text here is not helpful:
  • Current alt text: "Colour photograph of The Dance of Anitra"
  • Better alt text: "A photograph of a bronze statue, about half meter tall, of a young woman dancing, wearing a knee-length dress."

Ditto for alt text of all images.

• I've expanded these. Note that per this 2019 RfC (see also this 2024 discussion), alt text is not a FAC requirement. I do agree that it's good practice to include it, although opinions vary on what constitutes useful alt text. WP:ALT, for its part, states that Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush", while others prefer more detailed descriptions. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• The "Background" body text in the article seems unusually large, relative to the body text of the sculpture itself. Normally, the Backtround info is about 5% to 20% of an article. But here it seem to be about 50% to 70% of the article. That might be justified if there were no "main" articles for the background material, but there are main articles in WP already:
  • Edith Maryon
  • Peer Gynt
  • Maud Allan

The WP:FACR criterion #4 says the article must "stay focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate". The way the article stands now, the excess background material looks like it was added to pad the article to make it larger. It is okay for the article to be small ... lots of small articles achieve FA status. I see in the GA review that the same "size of background" issue was raised, and some background material was trimmed at that time .... Consider trimming more.

• I'm certainly not opposed to short articles (see Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)), but here we're dealing with an object at the intersection of four different narratives. The background sections comply with summary style in that they focus on the relevant portions—especially now that (in response to the points made during the GA review) I've cut the article by about a third. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Citations & sources: look good: they comply with the WP WP:V and WP:CITINGSOURCES guidelines.

• Cite bundling: some sentences have 4 or 5 superscript cites: e.g. The Dance of Anitra is made of bronze.[76][77][78][79][80]. That is kinda ugly. Consider bundling the cites in to a single superscript. Personally, I use Template:Multiref, but there are lots of ways to bundle.

• I've cut down a number of these so that I think there are only two with four cites, and none with five. Perspectives vary on this, but I tend to prefer a different footnote cites for each source. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Bibliography: The anonymous (no author) sources are intermingled with the sources-with-authors. I suppose that is permitted, but consider separating them into two separate groups. Seems odd to have last names mixed up with the article names. Not required for FA, but something to consider.

• I tend to use two main citation styles. For articles with lots of sources without page ranges (e.g., newspaper articles), I use both short cites and full cites in the "References" section (Robert Kaske#References is an example of this). For articles where most of the sources have page ranges (namely books), I use just short cites. Here, it's on the edge—there are about a dozen newspaper articles (which tend to be the anonymous ones you note), and these could be moved up to the References section. On balance, though, I think it looks better this way. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:31, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree that moving the no-author sources up into the References section is not good. But consider segregating them, as in this article: Bridge#Unknown_author. No big deal, just a suggestion. Noleander (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Choreography? Do sources describe the choreography of the dance?

• Not any of which I'm aware. I included all the contemporary sources I could find discussing Allan's performance, and I don't believe the play itself gives any directions. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:58, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• Should the quote be paraphrased? the auction house Dreweatts wrote, captures her "charisma, mysticism, movement and sensual stage performance" in the midst of "the seductive dance which emphasises the grace and beauty of Anitra". That's a big quote. WP is an encyclopedia, so the body text should be in the encyclopedia's voice unless there is a good reason a quote is required. See Wikipedia:Quotations. Quotes should be used when the speaker is saying something (a) controversial or contentious; or (b) particularly poetic or unique; or (c) when the exact words used by the speaker are critical.

• There aren't many sources giving interpretive descriptions of the sculpture, and it's nice to include what we can. Given that it's interpretive, however, I agree that we should be clear whose voice the words are in. It now reads: Allan is captured mid-dance. According to the auction house Dreweatts, "The depiction of Maud Allan in this bronze captures the dancer's charisma, mysticism, movement and sensual stage presence as she performs the seductive dance which emphasises the grace and beauty of Anitra". --Usernameunique (talk) 02:26, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• That is all for now. Noleander (talk) 12:22, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for your review, Noleander. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:27, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

  Hi Noleander, just touching base to see if you have any more comments, or might be interested in offering your support. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments by JacobTheRox

• Feel free to disagree with me and sorry if I've repeated from others' comments
• There are quite a few redlinks – please make sure they are worthy of inclusion. These are:
  • The Representative of Humanity
  • Salome and the Head
  • Rex Raab in the citations. I think if you have an ILL for him in the body there's no point having the redlink in the footnotes. The other way you can do it is delete the first name Rex and just put {{Interlanguage link|Rex Raab|lt=Raab, Rex|de}} in the last name section. Just be careful this doesn't break sfns though.
    • Opinions vary on this issue, although the relevant guideline generally favors including red links when the subject is notable and verifiable. The "nutshell" summary of the page states (with emphasis retained) that Red links are for topics that should have articles but do not. They are not only acceptable but also needed in articles. They serve as a clear indication of which articles are in need of creation, and encourage it. Remove red links only if you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on that subject. I don't think there's any question that any of the red-linked subjects are both notable and verifiable: The people all have pages on different-language wikis, and the other two are discussed in many sources (there are literal books about The Representative of Humanity, and a bunch of reviews of Salome and the Head). --Usernameunique (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• I would use {{refbegin}} and {{refend}} in the Bibliography as it would appear a lot neater.

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• My personal feeling is that some of the background on Peer Gynt is at the point of trivia. The following quote is essentially irrelevant to the sculpture and could be a single sentence:

He is now along the south-west coast of Morocco, and enjoying dinner with four travel companions taken aboard his steam yacht in Gibraltar. Gynt regales his companions with his life's story: In his telling, he was betrothed to a woman "of royal blood", but objected to her father's request that he take a title in order to marry her. He left, made his fortune trading slaves to the Carolinas, and heathen images to China, and then—questioning the morality of these enterprises—used "The last cargo of flesh" to open his own plantation, and operated a dual trade in China, where he sold idols to non-Christians, and goods to Christian missionaries that they then used to barter away the idols.

• I've cut out part of the explanation for how he made his money. The play uses this section to catch the reader up to speed—Act III ended with Peer Gynt leaving his homeland, meaning that everything that happens between then and his appearance in Morocco happens offstage. This section is thus important to learning who the Peer Gynt is who appears before Anitra. In this section, we learn relevant facts including that (a) he is in Morocco, (b) he is still a liar (he didn't object to taking a title; he was run out of town), (c) he is still a cad with little regard for others except in the sense of how they can benefit him. This is the person for whom Anita—at his command—dances. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• I'm confused as to whether Anitra's Dance was included in the original Peer Gynt at all, or how it was affected by the alterations made before performance.

• Peer Gynt was originally published as a book. It does't describe the dance in any detail other than that it was performed—rather, we are treated to the woman paeaning Gynt as they dance, and to Gynt's monologue on Anitra's looks. Ibsen seems to have been well aware while writing that actually performing the (long and complicated) play would require some alterations. I imagine that most of these included the dance—the accompanying music is some of Grieg's most famous, after all—but there have been different approaches, and it would be difficult to call any of these performances (as opposed to the written work) the "official" version. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:34, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• There is, in my opinion, a little bit of WP:OVERCITE. For example, "The Dance of Anitra is made of bronze" is not a controversial statement and does not need four citations just because there are four (or more sources) that corroborate it. There are, I imagine, other instances where you are using many citations for a single, non-controversial claim and you could consider cutting down on this.

• The multiple references are really just (a) to give the full range of sources available, and (b) because some sources have multiple versions (e.g., the print/online auction catalogue, and the German/English versions of Selg). I've used the {{sfnm}} template to bundle the latter category, which helps a bit, and means there are no more places with four or more cites in a row. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:53, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• I think the efn is interesting enough to be in the main body.

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• Use {{inflation/fn}} when using inflation figures because the price in 2024 is not corroborated by the source. I suggest inserting this before the closing bracket.

• Good thought, added to the three places that use the {{inflation}} template. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:40, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• That's all for now. Based on a successful source review above I will likely support once these issues have been discussed.

• Thanks very much for the review, JacobTheRox. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• P.S. my article Robert Jacomb-Hood is on FAC as well right now. Please consider dropping by!

Image review by JacobTheRox

• File:Figure skating pictogram.svg – public domain
• The multiple image of the medallists may as well be centred if it's not wrapping text – up to you though.

• I like everything left-justified.

• File:Russian Nationals 2022 Anna Shcherbakova.jpg – CC-BY-SA
• File:Trusova - RusNat 2022 - FS.jpg – CC-BY-SA
• File:Kaori Sakamoto performing her free skate at the 2022 World Figure Skating Championships.jpg – CC-BY-SA
• File:Kamila Valiyeva (RUS) 2022.jpg
  • CC-BY-SA
  • "...after testing positive for trimetazidine: an anti-doping rule violation.". I think a comma here is more logical than a colon.}}
  • I think this image would be better in the section "Kamila Valieva controversy" to illustrate who she is, rather than later in the aftermath.

• The reason it is down further in the article is because the Controversy section is considerably shorter. I'll try relocating the image to see how it looks there. I also shortened the image caption, which at the same time fixes the comma v. colon issue.

• No requirement to add further illustration but an image of the stadium may be visually interesting. No glaring issues so the image review is a pass but please do respond to my minor suggestions. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:35, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

• I have added an image of the arena to the Background section. It forces the small skating infobox down a little, but I think it looks okay.

• * P.S. my article Robert Jacomb-Hood is on FAC as well right now. Please consider dropping by!

Other drive by comment

• The quote starting "We boundlessly..." then has a citation, ellipsis, then second part of the quote with a second citation. This seems a bit more jumbled than putting both citations at the end.

• There were inconsistencies in the translation of that quote from the original Russian, so the first source confirms the first half of the quote and the second source confirms the second half of the quote.

User:JacobTheRox: Thank you for taking the time to check out my article! I believe I have addressed all of your comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:31, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree,  Pass on the image review and I will make a final judgement once a source review has been completed. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 19:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Ollifant

• The lead is kinda short

• The lead doesn't appear to much shorter than, say, at Figure skating at the 2022 Winter Olympics – Team event. It addresses all of the major elements of the article.

• Keys could be used for the colored columns

• I don't see any colored columns?

• A lot of unnecessary duplication, for example "World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)" appears three times on the page, the acronym doesn't need to be repeated that many times

• I have always tried to follow MOS:REPEATLINK: "Link a term at most once per major section, at first occurrence."

• Can you explain the difference in use between "AP News" and "Associated Press"?

• AP News is the website; Associated Press is the agency which is occasionally cited on other news sites.

• "[Beijing, China]" -> "[Beijing], China"

• Both yield the same result, but I think the first is stylistically more visually appealing. "China" is not actually linked.

• Delink CEO

• I don't care one way or another, but the GA recommended I link it! 😂

That's what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 06:06, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

User:Olliefant: I have tried to address all of your comments. Thank you for taking the time to examine my article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:26, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Support Olliefant (she/her) 21:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from JacobTheRox

• Feel free to disagree with me and sorry that what started as chronological order devolved into chaos.
• The quotation beginning "has thoroughly convinced me..." is longer than 40 words and is thus recommended by MOS:QUOTATION to have a blockquote. I would reword slightly to move the quote to the end of the paragraph then it could conveniently be blockquoted.

• Good tip, this is now updated. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• The word "offense" is US English, whereas the rest of the article is written in British English, which makes sense for the subject. I would suggest also adding the English variation to the talk page, e.g. {{British English}} or {{Oxford English}}

• Thanks for catching this, I've corrected the word. As an AmEng speaker who actively edits articles on British subject matter, I strive to use BrEng but sometimes miss small differences. I see there is already a British English tag on the article, so I will leave it there. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Is the redlink The Man of Pleasure's Pocket Book likely to have an article soon and does it deserve one?

• Yes, I redlinked it with the thought that this could become an article soon. I started doing early research, but had trouble finding enough reliable sources and put it on pause for now. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Whether or not quotations start with capitals is contentious but I would try to remain consistent. "in April 1769 and declared, "Rank and beauty have been her ruin"." should surely be "in April 1769 and declared "rank and beauty [had] been her ruin"."? Pretty sure keeping 'have' makes the tense a bit dubious.

• I don't necessarily see an issue with the tense, but I have converted the quote to lower capitals. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• 12 counts of ".[ and 2 counts of ."[. Please stay consistent; I prefer the latter but it is very much your choice.

• Updated to use the latter format. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• You provide both the name of a song and quite a long quote in French, neither of which are translated.

• The folk song, I think, can remain as is since a wikilink is provided that provides the translation. But I've added a note that translates the longer quote into English. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• [29][30] could be combined into a single sfn.

• While they are from the same historian, the works cited are different. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• I would put in square brackets what "angellick" means (angelic?) or just replace it with the modern/correct spelling.

• I've added a [sic] tag to acknowledge its archaic spelling. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• As only 6 references are not sfns, you may want to consider making every reference an sfn even if it is only used once, such as on List of British monarchs or Assassination of Lord Mountbatten.

• All now converted to sfn. I also re-organized the references section to differentiate each source by type. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• As Ancestry is web-based, the url should be included with |url-access=subscription. If you accessed using the Wikipedia Library delete https://www-ancestryinstitution-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/ and replace it with https://www.ancestry.co.uk/.

• Yes, I did access it through the Wikipedia Library. I struggled with the URL and ended up removing it. I've added it back now per your advice. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• There are urls with varying access levels which are not described, which is inconvenient. These are as follows:
  • Andrew, Donna (2001) – subscription
  • Beasley, Edward (2017) – limited
  • Crossland, Alice Marie (2017) – limited
  • Johnston-Liik, Edith Mary (2006) – limited
  • "Review of The Life and Letters of Lady...." – subscription or limited, not sure here
  • etc. – this would be helpful to include for all links

Done. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• A very well written article and most my comments are just trivial suggestions. Withdrawing any mention of votes before a comprehensive source review is completed. Great work! JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC as well right now; feel free to drop by!

• @JacobTheRox: Thank you for your review! You were very detailed and caught things I had missed or struggled with how to correct. Please let me know if you notice anything else. I also would be happy to look into your article's review (and intend to also look at others to help out with the backlog as I shake off my FAC rust). Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

FAC is definitely busy at the moment, but that's the way I like it – more quality articles for everyone. If you could look at my nom I'd be very grateful; from this article I can see you certainly know what you're doing. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:44, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments by JacobTheRox

• Feel free to disagree with me on my comments
• "...for the German Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial Navy), named after.... – this makes it sound like its saying what the Navy is named after then makes you do a double take, so I'd add the word "and"
  • Done
• If it is unique, how is it the second of its kind and future ones are modifications of it? That doesn't sound unique!
  • "Unique" in the sense that it was the sole vessel of its design, that it had no sister ships
• Please clarify whether the following redlinks are notable for inclusion: – there seem quite a few
  • [II Scouting Group]]
  • III Scouting Group
  • IV Scouting Group
  • Albert Hopman
  • Curt von Prittwitz und Gaffron
  • Gustav Schmidt
  • Johannes von Karpf
  • Raimund Winkler
  • U-Kreuzer Flotilla
    • Yes, at some point I'll get around to writing articles on the units (such as I did some years back for III Battle Squadron, for example) - the individuals were all later admirals, and will easily pass GNG (and I have long-range plans to turn all of the links on List of admirals of Germany blue, though I'll need to track down a copy of this first!)
• "...than earlier Harvey armor, so less of it could be..." – the words "of it" can be removed
  • Good suggestion
• "...were Germany's worst designed and..." – change "worst designed" to "worst-designed"
  • Grammatically, you're right, but the source doesn't have it hyphenated - not sure it really warrants a [sic] though
• I would mention the year 1914 again at the start of the WWI section as it shouldn't rely on the end of the previous one
  • Done
• Correct cite order is [4][19] not [19][4]
  • Good catch
• When I try to find "Audorf-Rendsburg" it seems that's not a normal way of describing that area – is that the name used in the source? You could also wikilink the second half to Rendsburg, and I would add Schleswig-Holstein after.
  • That's what the source uses - it may be an older name for the town. If you look at this map, Audorf is across the Kiel Canal from Rendsburg
• Nottelmann, Dirk (2024) is not pointed to by any references; please remove it or make it an invisible comment if you'd like to use it later.
  • Moved to a further reading section for now - I'll need to go back and look to see if it has anything worth adding
• I have added {{section sizes}} to the talk page – perhaps you could even these out / add more to your liking as most sections are quite long, especially the initial part of the Design section
  • I don't think much can be done - they're split up thematically, and some will necessarily be longer than others.
• A very good article as the normal for a very good series of articles. I only found minor prose issues so look forward to seeing the source review come through. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 19:37, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Thanks Jacob! Parsecboy (talk) 17:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
• P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC at the moment as well; please feel free to drop by!
  • I'll try to find time to take a look.

Vacant0

Nice to see this here. I'll do a review at some point during this week. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

• Lede looks okay.
• It would be nice to combine multiple {{sfn}}s into {{sfnm}}s.
  • I tend to go with a maximum of three separate citations (or two citations and a note) - SchroCat (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• Description and etymology looks good.
• Could the History section be split in several sub-sections? It's quite long. No other issues with the section.
  • How does that look? - SchroCat (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• The Gentleman's Magazine should be italicised.
  • Oops; done - SchroCat (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
• Could the Lenten mince pies section be merged with some other one?
  • It could, but now crosses over two time sections, so wouldn't work as well. Short though it is, I think this possibly warrants its own section. - SchroCat (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Surprisingly, no issues with the rest of the article. Had I reviewed a bit earlier, I would have probably spotted some errors. I won't comment on images and references. These are mostly nitpicks, so I'll vote once you respond. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks Vacant0

Nothing else has catched my eye, so it's a support from me on prose and grammar. Cheers and good luck, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• "when returning European crusaders brought back with them spices." I'd move spices to before "back". Possibly "home" for "back"
• "puritans" "catholic" May seem odd to the reader.
• "Jesus's" (the link). While this does not specifically implicate any of the examples of WP:OL I wonder if anyone searching for information on mince pies will not have heard of Jesus. Just for your consideration. Especially in contrast with shortcrust, which is more deserving of a link, if they are in short supply.
• "Cumberland rum butter" I wonder if the reader, if puzzled by the phrase, benefits from an explanation of the former county.
• "n North America, it tends to be large and intended for sharing among several people.[8][9] As the ingredients were expensive, a pie was only eaten on feast days ... " I think we've switched back to UK customs. I confess though to being generally unfamiliar with mince pies, even at Thanksgiving (US) dinner (pumpkin was more usual).

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Wehwalt. I've addressed these ones, adding a bit of background (in a footnote) about the Cumberland rum butter too. Looking forward to anything else you have to say. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:41, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

• "and the level of alcohol in some tinned mincemeat rose to over 14 per cent in some cases.[43][17]" Some ... some. Not necessary to do it twice. The idea of the mince pie being the national dish of America until the 1940s is a bit surprising.
• "In North America, "cider" is the name given to non-alcoholic apple juice." There is a distinction between apple cider and apple juice. For one thing, apple cider is usually unfiltered.

That's about it. Very interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Wehwalt, all sorted.

Support--Wehwalt (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Laser brain

Thanks for the entry on this topic! I'm glad to see your time and talents manifest here. I think the article conforms well to the FA criteria. It is very well-written and well-researched. I am a bit unclear on one item:

• You write "its current vegetarian form" but it's clear that many mincemeat recipes and most jarred mincemeat contains beef or beef products. There are many vegetarian (and vegan) recipes out there but I'd like to improve how we present that information.

Thanks again for the enjoyable read. --Laser brain (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Laser_brain. I've taken out the word "vegetarian" to fudge the issue slightly, given you're right: it's available in vegan, vegetarian and non-vegetarian versions, albeit very different to the original version. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

• Support – splendid work as always. --Laser brain (talk) 01:12, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

RoySmith

Just a bit of a photo drive-by, the infobox image is not the best quality, especially for the top spot. Could we find something better? I think File:Mincemeat pie.jpg that you've currently got buried beneath the fold is a much more striking image, but perhaps not the most traditional version of the pie? If you wanted to stick with the individual serving sized theme, any of File:Mince Pies (15443417714).jpg, File:Mince Pie.jpg, or File:Mincemeat tarts for the holidays.jpg would be better than the current selection, but the latice-work example really is the best image from a purely visual standpoint. RoySmith (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks RoySmith. I went with File:Mince Pie.jpg in the end. While the lattice version may be the most striking, I don't think it's representative of a "typical" MP. That obviously differs for Americans, with their larger versions, but I think non-lattice is probably best. - SchroCat (talk) 09:12, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Good choice; that was the best of the non-lattice group. RoySmith (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text

• File:Portrait_of_Mr_Mince_Pie,_MP_for_Christmas.jpg: if the author is unknown, how do we know they died over 100 years ago? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:37, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks Nikkimaria, all sorted. - SchroCat (talk) 09:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments and support from Gerda

I'll comment as I read. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for a "sweet" contribution!

Infobox and lead

• The image is much better than the one I saw on the first reading.
• I wonder if we could say "Mince pie, cut" or something else?
  • Went with something slightly different - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• I wonder if the former ingredients could also show, which gave the dish a completely different character.
  • I don't understand what you've written - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• I think the list of these historic ingredients could be shorter in the lead than in the prose.
  • It's fine as it is. I'm not going to go down the route of OR to pick which ones I think would be best listed. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "this then changed to their becoming associated with Christmas, when they are mostly consumed", - I think that could be said more elegantly, and perhaps without mentioning Christmas again.
  • It's the only mention in this paragraph and it's necessary. It's also a different message from the previous paragraph, - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• I don't think we need the years of the Interregnum for this food lead, - enough later on, there's a link for those curious.
  • I think I disagree. For those who only read the lead, they need an anchor to know when we're talking about. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "although it was stigmatised for its indulgent and supposed Catholic connotations", - perhaps it's my lack of English but I have a few problems with this clause:
  1. I would understand "because" better than "although".
  2. I don't know what "indulgent connotations" would be.
  3. I am not sure that "connotations" is the best term for that it seemed to come from a Catholic tradition.

"Because" would be grammatically wrong - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

It's explained in the body

"Connotations" is the correct word - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

• I don't think we need the details of folklore in the lead.
  • I disagree. It's strongly referenced in the histories and should certainly appear up top. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• Generally, too many sentences in this lead (for my taste) copy word for word what's in the body, instead of a summary.
  • De gustibus and all that. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Description

• On top of the pics, I suggest simply "Preparation", what else than mince pie? Or no title, it's rather evident.
  • I'm not sure I agree, but I've swapped it out - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• The captions could also be much shorter, for example: "Bottom and filling" - "Ready for baking" - Dusted with icing sugar".
  • They could, but I think they're fine as they are. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• The description begins with the current style, and later has differences only for the filling, but I wonder about "sweet" for the crust anyway, knowing of pie crusts even for sweet pies that have no sugar. Perhaps different descriptions for different ingredients or styles would be better?
  • I'm not sure I understand what you've written. Are you suggesting removing the word "sweet" from the pastry description? - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• It's said twice that the mincemeat can be homemade or not.
  • Deleted one - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

History

• There is a century given for the spices, but not for the Cumberland theory.
  • Because the source doesn't provide it. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• No link needed for Middle East.
  • Delinked - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• I wonder if "crust not eaten" might be mentioned in the lead.
  • It's a very minor point that I don't think is lead-worthy - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "included mutton with the same amount of beef suet and "twice so much sugar as salt" leaves open "same" to what the fat is.
  • I don't understand what you've written - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• Until I saw the shapes images, I thought that pies are round. How about a reference to it in the text?
  • Not all pies are round. Quite a few are square (including the mince pie, which we already mention). Aside from the square or oblong, there's very little mention of the shapes in the sources, except via diagrams. - SchroCat (talk) 16:25, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "the second was requires 3 large lemons" needs a decision for one verb.
  • Tweaked - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "The mince pie was considered the national dish of America" comes as a surprise after earlier "never as popular", - perhaps also lead-worthy?
  • Possibly. It's only one source that says it and I've not seen anything else that backs it up, so I'm a little reticent of giving it that much weight. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
• "During the Elizabethan era, when meatless dishes were required during the period of Lent" surprises me, because "meatless" was a custom for Lent observed by earlier (and later) Catholics as well.
  • It doesn't surprise me - there wasn't a huge amount of practical difference in lifestyle practice between the two in that period. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

See also

• I don't need it.
  • There's a couple of sources that refer to it as being vaguely related. If I take it out, I suspect someone else would put it back in. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for information that was all new to me; I haven't tasted mince pie yet. Please understand that some comments may come from ignorance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining, - support. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:51, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Support from Whonting

Thankyou Schro for the work that you have done for this article (and for the edits at chewette). The article is in great shape and will certainly influence my writing in this area. I'm happy with how the article has developed through PR, I only have two questions on history remaining that I would like to hear your thoughts on:

• a recipe similar to that of the original mince pie; from context, this "original mince pie" appears to be Markham's recipe. Is this intended?
• Identifying The Forme of Cury's "tartes of flessh" as "a forerunner of the mince pie" in an image caption appears to be engaging the debate on origins.

That's all. A bit sad the lead image was changed, but it is what it is. Looking forward to supporting shortly. Whonting (talk) 11:51, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks Whonting - and nice work on chewette too! These both sorted. I've tweaked both to 'a possible forerunner of the mince pie', which both explains and fudges in equal measure. - SchroCat (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thankyou Schro for this, that resolves my concerns. Whonting (talk) 13:21, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Support and comments from Jim

As a Londoner, the very first thing I checked was the rhyming slang! I also noted One is that it is lucky to eat as many mince pies as possible before Christmas... others think it is bad luck to refuse to eat a mince pie that has been offered to you. so my normal practice brings good fortune! A couple of comments for your consideration.

• Perhaps link tripe in para 2?
• is often served with an accompaniment such as cream, brandy butter, Cumberland rum butter I don't like this, the link to the county is unhelpful there, as mentioned before. Suggest delink here and link in the footnote to Named after the historic county of the same name, Cumberland rum butter is...

Either way, I'll Support, although it might be a while before I strike because I'm off to Alicante, cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:08, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

• Thanks Jim. Both done (I went with "the historic county" to avoid any Easter egg complications, but much the same as your suggestion). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley

Indescribably revolting though mince pies taste I enjoyed this article – well up to SchoCat's standard for his food and foodie articles. The Elizabethans and Cumberland get more than their fair share of blue links but that is of little consequence. You may not care (I don't particularly) that some of your multiple citations are in random rather than numerical order: [26][12] & [43][17] & [11][67][46] & [74][10]. That apart, no carps or quibbles from me. Happy to support promotion to FA. Meets all the criteria in my view. – Tim riley talk 13:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks Tim. I'm also unconcerned by the running order of the citations, but as some people are, I've tweaked them all be run in order. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:38, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

toby

I know absolutely nothing of pies or the culinary arts in general, yet somehow, this article caught my attention. Of course, feel free to object to what I ask. Here are my comments. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 04:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

To the other reviewers, please consider checking out my FAC nom!

• Perhaps link brandy?
• Its history is a matter of debate but it dates back to the medieval period... -> Though disputed its history dates back to the medieval period...
• ...tripe and could also include fish. Since the sentence says recipes "varied", it's safe to assume they may or may not have included fish.
• ...the pies were only eaten on feast days; this then changed to their becoming associated with Christmas... -> ...the pies were only eaten on feast days; this changed to becoming associated with Christmas...
• The mince pie was attacked by... This part threw me for a loop for a second or two as I didn't know pies could be attacked. That was before I finished the sentence clarifying how the pie was stigmatized. Is there any way to rephrase this?
• The recipe for the mince pie was taken... -> Its recipe was taken...
• ...although vegetable alternatives can also be used.
• In Britain in the twenty-first century, a mince pie tends to be... Perhaps: In the twenty-first century, British mince pies tend to be...
• ...a pie was only eaten on feast days; this then changed to it becoming associated with Christmas... -> ...a pie was only eaten on feast days; this changed to an asssociation with Christmas...
• A mince pie can be made at home or purchased from commercial outlets; similarly, the mincemeat can homemade or commercially produced. Perhaps: Pies and their mincemeat can be homemade or commercially bought.
• ...tripe and could also include fish. Like the above
• In the Elizabethan era the recipe had not changed much since the medieval version. -> The pie changed minimally during the Elizabethan era.
• The recipe for the mince pie was taken to... -> Its recipe was taken to...
• It is not know exactly... I assume this should be "known"

toby

Coming back from the peer review! I've always thought the game looked cool, but I never got around to playing it.

To the other reviewers, consider checking out my FAC nom! toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 20:38, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Why is "aberrations" in parantheses?
  • IIRC, this was left from the copyedit. I've changed it to: "The player can catch regular fish as well as mutated versions called aberrations". Hopefully, this is what you wanted.
• ...the player can improve their skills by reading books... It's unclear what improving skills exactly affects.
  • By reading books you boost the player's stats. Dredge Wiki summarises these stats well. How do you want me to clarify this?
    • I've rephrased it to, ...the fisherman's attributes are improved by reading books...
• ...throughout the night, the game embraces horror elements when the fog appears. -> ... throughout the night, the game embraces horror elements when a fog appears. Sounds weird to my ears calling it "the" fog when it was never mentioned hitherto.
  • Done.
• A passive mode is featured in Dredge, which disables enemies from hunting the player. -> Dredge features a game mode that disables enemies from hunting the player. For clarification, does the mode disable enemies from existence or disable their aggresive behavior?
  • Never have played passive mode, so if we trust what the Internet says, it means that their aggression is disabled. They still appear in the game, just without the ability to hurt the player.
• I see that the image caption links sea monsters. I'd imagine this link should also be utilized somewhere in the body as it seems pretty relevant.
  • There actually was a wikilink to sea monsters in the prose but I've removed it because of a PR comment "seems like a borderlineMOS:EASTEREGG violation". What is your opinion on this? Should I reinstate the wikilink?
    • I've rephrased ...the player is chased by massive enemies... to ...the player is chased by massive sea monsters.
• In its original conception, Dredge would be a top-down turn-based game with elements similar to the final version, and not feature fishing mini-games. -> Dredge was conceived as a top-down turn-based game with elements similar to the final version but without fishing mini-games.
  • Done.
• ...and the mobility mechanism. Do you mean the movement system of the boat?
  • Yup. What do you want me to do here?
    • I rephrased it to ...and the movement system. as I think the lack of demotic wording confused me.
• ...the team developed four additional biomes (archipelagos). I don't see the need to put archipelagos in parentheses.
  • Done (removed the entire part, if that's what you wanted me to do, of course).
• The game's programmer and author, Joel Mason, stated that the player can visit other archipelagos in any sequence, although the second location... The fifth and last region... This stretch says the exploration of the archipelagos has no order yet you list them as the "first", "second", etc. This doesn't make sense to me.
  • Okay... I'll explain. Dredge is an open world game, meaning that you can go wherever you want in any order you want. HOWEVER, despite this devs have actually made an intended order of which islands to visit in which order. So, Gale Cliffs is the second archipelago of the game that the player should visit. But they don't have to, they can go to Stellar Basin instead, or Twisted Strand. Do you get what I mean? How should we clarify this?
    • I've rephrased it: ...stated that the archipelagos can be explored in any sequence, but were designed to promote a specific order; the second...
• As someone who doesn't know much about oceans, I didn't know what a blue hole is and I'd prefer not having to click the link per MOS:NOFORCELINK.
  • Did it for ya.
• ...to avoid focusing the game on jump scare horror. -> ...to avoid utilizing jump scare horror.
  • Done.
• Is it possible to define or describe Lovecraftian horror? I know what it is already, but I'd imagine there are some readers who do not.
  • Done.
• Probably worth it to include the release date of Dave the Diver like how you did so with other game mentions.
  • Good catch.
• Edwin Evans-Thirlwell of Eurogamer and Zoey Handley of Destructoid disliked the plot. No clarification?
  • Destructoid: "The plot is lifeless". Eurogamer: "The plot doesn't develop much". :/
    • Eurogamer seems to describe the game as lacking depth compared to traditional Lovecraftian stories in the succeeding sentence. I think you can include this.
• ...heads-up display (HUD)... I'd assume there's no need to abbreviate heads-up display as HUD if there is no other use of the term in the article.
  • Done.

Thanks for the review, @Tarlby:. I've mostly implemented everything you suggested but left a few questions on some points. Hopefully all is alright. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I've dealt with the questions above; review my responses and bold CEs (revert or alter if needed). From an indie game FAC nommer to another, I support. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 07:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I approve the prose changes. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Airship

As always, these are suggestions, not demands; feel free to refuse with adequate justification.

Firstly, by my calculation, 625 of around 3,000 prose words in the body (over 20%) are sourced to this YouTube documentary, which seems, from my cursory inspection, to be mostly composed of interviews with the developers. Those 625 words comprise the wide majority of the "Development" section. With that in mind, could you please clarify how the article complies with the following from the core content policy WP:PRIMARY: "be cautious about basing large passages on [primary sources]"? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Actually, most development sections rely on interviews with people who made the game. I'll give quick examples from recently-promoted FAs: Splatoon 3: Side Order's development section mostly comprises of interviews, while Hogwarts Legacy does it slightly less. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (GBA video game) also relies on interviews. Outer Wilds, a slightly older FA from 2024, heavily relies on Noclip in the development section. Another current FAC nomination, Horizon Zero Dawn, somewhat relies on Noclip, but considering that it's a much much bigger game, it also relies on other interviews. Speaking about my previous FAs, Smash Hit's development section mostly relies on primary sources (personal articles published in reliable sources). Same goes for Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures (interviews). Nobody complained about this in any of those FAC nominations. I think that it'd be counterproductive to not include such information in articles (even though they are primary sources), considering that there's no other way of obtaining such answers than directly asking people who made the game about various aspects of the development. Technically, not including such information in articles would mean that they do not meet FA#1b criteria (comprehensibility). I might be wrong, but this most likely applies to other forms of media (films, songs, albums), not just video games. I'd love to hear opinions of others, because I don't think that this has been ever been brought up in FAC nominations which rely on interviews for development sections. I'd say that WP:IAR should apply here if we'd want to improve Wikipedia and obtain more high-quality articles (FAs and GAs). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

I think we've got off on the wrong foot here. I don't think obtaining FAs and GAs necessarily contributes to improving Wikipedia (invoking IAR is a bit much), and I'm not really interested in discussing seven other FA candidacies. That said, I take your point that the nature of video games perhaps lend themselves easier to interviews explaining the progression of development, and doing a bit more research, it appears that Noclip might be viewed as a secondary source in some respects. Would you agree? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Yup, I agree. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Laser brain

Placeholder – reviewing now. --Laser brain (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose at this time, I'm sorry.

• I shouldn't be finding basic grammatical errors at FAC.
• Reading through the "Art style" and "Gameplay" sections, I find the prose to be clunky and not engaging. Passages like "He was inspired by Disco Elysium (2019) because of the game's abstract nature. The water shaders were altered multiple times during the development process." lack context and there is an overall lack of a cohesive narrative through both sections. "Gameplay" jumps right into "The upgrading system" without any explanation or context.
• "Dredge has a low-poly (a polygon mesh that has a low number of polygons) art style" – a high number of statements like this are attributed to Gabriel Moss who is listed as a "freelance reviewer" and I can't find any information on his notability as a video game journalist. One would hope for better sources, for the most part.

These are just a few selections but I'm not encouraged that this is up to FA standards at this time. --Laser brain (talk) 10:30, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to hear this LB. I've made further changes to the article to include your suggestions. Hopefully another editor will chip in with another copyedit. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm willing to help out, but can you address the sourcing issue? Has the use of Moss been reduced? I'm not sure of the current sourcing standards for video games articles but I'd think we'd prefer more notable journalists if possible. --Laser brain (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Laser brain, quick heads up that I heard of your comments here in an off-wiki chat with Vacant. Just on the point on Moss, the art style being low-poly isn't something that should need a high bar of sourcing, or even really any. Identifying works like File:Wikipe-tan pixel art.svg as pixel art for instance wouldn't be considered WP:OR. Even if it were, much more relevant than a writer being staff or not staff for reliability is the outlet publishing the piece under the IGN brand, staking their brand on the review's quality. Are there more contentious statements being sourced to Moss that you are more concerned about? Whonting (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not troubled with Moss if you're saying we are using that source for non-controversial claims. I wasn't previously aware of IGN's process for vetting contributors. Thanks for the clarification! --Laser brain (talk) 13:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey LB. I'll do another round of copy edits today and look to address the rest of your concerns. In the mean time, we can discuss on improving the prose. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Should be done now. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, striking my opposition as things look more polished. I'll run through it again this weekend with an eye toward copyediting and hopefully we can get this thing across the finish line. --Laser brain (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from MSincccc

Early life (Family)

• with unpublished material from the Christ's Hospital school archives
  • You could link to "Christ's Hospital" on first mention.
  • Done
• You could link to Bardon, Leicestershire as a whole.
  • Currently Bardon Hall is a relink to Bardon, but I plan to change this because the house and estate is 100% worth an article (I have many sources on it). I've delinked Bardon Hall for now and linked Bardon, Leics.
• How about the rephrased sentence: He was baptised in Riseley on 21 February 1822, according to unpublished Christ’s Hospital school archives. or similar versions?
  • Done, but I want to make sure it's clear that the happening and place of his baptism aren't just in unpublished archive material, which is what the disclaimer is for.

MSincccc (talk) 09:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Usernameunique

The substantial amount of work and research that has gone into this article shows, and, on balance, it appears to be in decent shape. The above issues, if addressed carefully, should not be an impediment to promotion. I'm still working on my copyedit, and may return with some line-by-line comments. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments.

These issues—particularly the primary sources and over-citing—look a lot better to me now. I'm collapsing those issues to mark them as resolved. I'll also try to come back for some line-by-line comments. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Family

• the daughter of John Kemp — Any word on what he did?
  • Not in the sources, hence why it wasn't included
• the Beechhill estate — What is this?
  • Just another estate where he lived – but shows he's a member of the aristocracy in contrast to Jacomb-Hood's mother.
• Is there anything to which to link for Bardon Hall? If not, is it worth a red link?
  • Currently Bardon Hall is a redirect to Bardon, Leicestershire so I don't want the two next to each other as that would be confusing. The estate is definitely worth an article as there are loads of good sources out there discussing its history, including a whole load of quarrying and railways. However, I don't have the time to write it at the moment.
• If Robert Jacomb the elder became Robert Jacomb-Hood upon William Hood's death in the 1830s, doesn't that mean that Robert Jacomb-Hood the younger (the subject of the article) was actually born Robert Jacomb—without the Hood? If so, this should be stated somewhere.
  • Yes, and now you say it it seems obvious lol. I've changed it in the infobox and prose but I'm not going to change them all to Robert Jacomb before the inheritance as that would just increase the confusion even more.
• Did the inheritance of Bardon Hall come with an inheritance of money as well?
  • The term "estate" generally refers to the land, house, and the money attached to it, so short answer probably yes
• I spent some time searching on British Newspaper Archive, unsuccessfully, to try to pin down the date of William Hood's death. In doing so, however, I came across an 1833 article discussing the death of Rev. R. Jacomb, who was related to "the late Edmund Hood, Esq. of Bardon Hall". Any idea who these guys were?
  • There is a Rev. R. Jacomb who is the paternal grandfather of the subject of the article, as mentioned on page 10 here, but he is said to have died 1806. Maybe it's just another one? Even if not the most direct relation of Jacomb-Hood, it would still make sense they're all related to both families.
• What was the Worshipful Company of Fan Makers, and why would a tenant farmer be a part of it?
  • That's kind of the point – having inherited an estate, being admitted to one of the livery companies would have shown that he'd moved up in society and was now a proper tradesperson.

Education

• he was sponsored by George Green, the governor for donations at the school — Is this particularly relevant? From what I can tell, the salient point is that his tuition was free because his family was poor. Is that correct?
  • Reduced to his being sponsored, just to point out it wasn't e.g. government funding
• As a result of his father's inheritance of Bardon Hall, he was removed from the school in 1835 — Perhaps worth clarifying that it was the improved economic status that came with the inheritance that led to his removal from the school.
  • Done
• Jacomb-Hood's father was unhappy with the quality of instruction — Why?
  • That's all it says in the source; I guess it just wasn't a good school
• Bardon Park, where the father was undertaking renovation works — What's the difference between Bardon Park and Bardon Hall? What were the renovation works?
  • Bardon Park is the estate and Bardon Hall is the house, I've fixed the inconsistent use. His renovations are described in the paragraph starting Robert Jacomb's[b] cousin....
• Jacomb-Hood was educated in Hathern, Leicestershire, as a precursor to him studying at the University of Cambridge — Where in Hathern—a school? Why would this be a precursor to Cambridge?
  • Well the lack of a school suggests he was educated by someone rather than at a school, but no name is given. In those days, getting into university wasn't really the same so to get into Cambridge was about having had a certain background or education, rather than certain grades/intelligence. The tutor in Hathern would have taught Jacomb-Hood about the style of education at Cambridge and the kind of things they wanted a student to have done (e.g. learned Latin), so he would be suitable for admission. If you think it necessary I can add a footnote.
• the family moved to Cheltenham, Gloucestershire — Why? What happened to Bardon Hall?
  • Well in those days that was normal – they had inherited an estate in the middle of nowhere so using the money to buy houses in bigger settlements would have made sense, and then Bardon Park would have been their retreat.

1841–1846: Early career

• After he finished his work for the M&BR, Jacomb-Hood was tasked with managing the parliamentary work of the Manchester, South Junction and Altrincham Railway, before being promoted to Resident Engineer of the railway from 1 September 1844. — How does this fit into his previous work, i.e., who was employing him at this point?
  • It doesn't. I've clarified that this was a change of job essentially.

1846–1850: Early LB&SCR work

• in rented accommodation — Should this be in a rented accommodation?
  • Don't think so? Accommodation isn't an individual thing you can have one of, but a concept?
• The rate of construction led to his salary being increased — What do you mean by "The rate of construction"? Also, note that the previous sentence was about how his work did not always involve construction.
  • Reworded – he was building railway lines quickly so he got more money for being efficient
• Rather than giving the title of the paper followed by a footnote with the full title of the paper, you could just say "Earlier that year, on 2 April, Jacomb-Hood had presented a paper detailing [DESCRIPTION]". This would obviate (a) the footnote (because the full title is already in the cite) and (b) the part following the semicolon (which is the description you move to the fist clause).
  • Done
• Is the final paragraph a bit out of order? You talk about the paper discussing the Grand Surrey Canal bridge before you talk about the bridge itself. Should it not be (a) he engineered the bridge from October 1848 and June 1849, and then (b) he presented a paper on it in April 1849?
  • I mean technically it's not chronological but I think it reads nicer that way
• a Council Premium of Books — What is this?
  • Just an internal prize within the Institution of Civil Engineers that they award to the best papers

Comments from Ruby2010

Reading through the article now, it's clear it's well researched and ably written. Nonetheless, here are some early thoughts or suggestions:

• I find it interesting that you've used different citation styles for primary vs secondary sources (using a different symbol for each style). I'm not opposed to this, but am curious on your reasoning. Is this useful for the reader?
  • The primary sources have been highlighted on many occasions as a weakness in the article. Were anyone to just write a biography of him all this stuff would become secondary but alas, we are where we are. I want the reader to be aware that the cited statements are coming directly from the records rather than a secondary source, which should be a point of caution for the reader.
    • Drive-by comment: Chiswick Chap and I did something similar in Martin Rundkvist. That article contains many cites to primary sources (namely his own publications and bios), and—due to a relentless effort to delete the article once, and then again—we needed to make obvious that many secondary sources also existed. Here, I agree that the distinction similarly helps to show that the primary sources are mostly buttressing and giving finer detail to information that's in secondary sources. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
      • Thank you for your comment and that's exactly what I'm aiming for here – it's helpful to have primary sources that can just add that little bit extra flourish or context (e.g. a date).
• Is there a wiki article for St Mary And All Saints Church? If not, is it worthy of a redlink?
  • It's Grade II* listed so a pretty certain yes. One redlink added in the prose but a second in the caption is unnecessary imo.
    • I have created an article on the topic and sent it to GAN.
• "...by building a New Hall in 1835 and demolishing the Old Hall building around 1840..." Are these proper nouns that need to be capitalized?
  • Multiple sources capitalise them and suggest "Old Hall" and "New Hall" were literally what the buildings were called
• I was confused by who inherited William Hood's estate until reading more about it in the "Education" section. Could you make this clearer in the "Family" section? (Both persons being unoriginally named Robert, it's a tad confusing to keep track).
  • Yes, and unfortunately your edit to the infobox is not correct. The subject of this article, Robert Jacomb-Hood, was born with that name. He inherited the estate from his father, who was born Robert Jacomb and then became Robert Jacomb-Hood. (Still following?). His father, Robert Jacomb-turned-Robert Jacomb-Hood, had inherited the estate from William Hood soon after Robert Jacomb-Hood-the-younger's birth. Robert Jacomb-Hood-the-younger (the subject of the article) then sold the estate, and thankfully, according to my knowledge^{[better source needed]} named none of his kids Robert!

On a serious note, some sources use Senior/Junior, and some I and II. However, I am sceptical of these because they're not the names anyone would have called either, but rather historians making their own lives easier. I have added two efns explaining the situation and hope that is enough. However, I can envisage others saying these efns are unencyclopedic in tone.

• I count 10 uses of "however". Might you have a substitute word for some of those? Ruby2010 (talk) 20:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Fixed.
  • Thank you for your comments!

HF

Will leave some comments below - I intend for this to eventually be a full review but I can't promise as there is some stuff going on IRL for me the timing of which isn't in my control. Hog Farm _Talk 23:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Several of my comments from the prior FAC have not been addressed.

• "A former classmate from Hathern, Albert Pell, had been employed at the company, however, and warned Jacomb-Hood against working there" - the writing in the source seems a bit stilted to me, but I'm still not reading the material in the source as being a clear reference to Pell, although it's certainly possible from the wording. Unless you have a reason to be highly confident that this is a direct reference to Pell, I think it's better off to just drop the reference to Pell the text of your article
  • I have reread the source and I'm still sure that when it says "his former classmate" it's a reference to his only named former classmate, Albert Pell, with whom he went to see railway construction.
• What are your thoughts on the "fortunate" truncation I reference in the prior FAC? I'm not a huge fan of using a different word than RJH's actual quote and still putting it in quotation marks, but this is a bit of an awkward circumstance with the current phrasing of the article not really permitting a true quote
  • I have expanded the quote
• "On 10 June 1850, Jacomb-Hood attended the opening of The Crystal Palace on its new site with his wife, having been responsible for the construction of the railway line serving it and later becoming a director on the board." - Jackson specifically states this was 10 June 1854 and the obituary doesn't mention this visit. The Crystal Palace itself opened to the public in 1851.
  • The crystal palace opened on its new site on 10 June 1854, the date mentioned by Jackson (I've corrected it). This is the same fact as on The Crystal Palace's article, in the sentence:

Within two years the rebuilt Crystal Palace was complete, and on 10 June 1854, Queen Victoria again performed an opening ceremony, in the presence of 40,000 guests.^[1]

• "By 1855, Jacomb-Hood's salary had reached £1,059" - like mentioned in the prior FAC, there is a semantical difference between salary (750 pounds) and total compensation (the 1,059 figure). This is seen even in the cited source (Jackson)
  • Reworded
• "he would start this work on 7 August 1858 and would open on 11 October of the same year" - as noted in the prior FAC, Jackson indicates that the work began on 7 August 1857 and was completed on 11 October 1858, so the former year needs corrected (which is not unexpected, given that two months to finish a railway would be remarkably good time)
  • Done
• " tasking him with work in Portsmouth and Newcastle before finding him a job in Bombay, India (now Mumbai) in October 1858" - like noted in the prior FAC, Jackson places all of this information under his header for 1857, not 1858.
  • Done

JacobTheRox - could you please respond to or correct these issues which were identified in FAC1 and then respond to me? It's admittedly frustrating to have to go back through the prior FAC line-by-line and see what has actually been addressed. Hog Farm _Talk 00:10, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

• • Sorry, looking back now I realise I missed your last set of comments on 25 August. Thank you for raising them again and I think I have responded to all of them. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 09:09, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

References

Image review

Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• File:Dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Mind-body dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Ethical dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Theological dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Platonic dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Epistemological dualism.svg - CC0
• File:Kapila (cropped).png - Public Domain
• File:Yin yang.svg - Public Domain
• File:Frans Hals - Portret van René Descartes.jpg - Public Domain
• All of the images have alt-text for accessibility, proper captioning, and are all relevant to the article.
  • Passing image review.

    @Arconning: Thanks for the image review! Phlsph7 (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Streded

This is my first ever attempt to review a featured article candidate. I'm not sure how to format it, so I'll improvise. Streded (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Streded and thanks for giving FA reviewing a try! There is no fixed format here and different reviewers use different styles, so improvising in line with Wikipedia commonsense should be fine. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 16:22, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  Hi, MSincccc, nice to see you for another review! Phlsph7 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Phlsph7 I am currently involved in three active nominations at FAC, one of which I intend to conclude by tomorrow. I have also promised another user a review, which can be done in parallel with yours, have an open listing at PR of my own, and am preparing for my next set of examinations.

  So this might take some time, but I look forward to another engaging read. Cheers. MSincccc (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for the heads-up. The nomination just started, so there is no rush. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• As an initial comment, I would suggest adding the relevant language template ("Use... English") to the mainspace. MSincccc (talk) 16:37, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Definition and related terms

• You could tweak the section heading to include "etymology".

  It could be done but it would make the section heading longer than it needs to be. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• You could link to linguistic systems.

  Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• For instance, the metaphysical pluralism of the pre-Socratic philosopher
  • How about linking "pre-Socratic philosopher" as a whole to Pre-Socratic philosophy?

    Normally, I would have. but since "Empedocles" is already linked, this would turn into a WP:SEAOFBLUE. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• Since monism, dualism, and other forms of pluralism
  • Do we need the comma after "and"?

    I don't think there should be a comma after "and". The comma before the "and" is the Oxford comma. As I understand it, the comma is not mandatory in general but it's needed here for consistency. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• they differ from nihilist or eliminativist theories
  • How about linking to the article Nihilism?

    Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• "differ from each other by the type of division and principles they posit" → "differ in the type of division and principles they posit"

  Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• "shaping how to understand" → "shaping how we understand"

  While philosophical texts use this kind of language, I'm careful because it usually doesn't take long until someone complains about MOS:WE. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• The first known use was in 1794 by the satirist and scholar Thomas James Mathias.
  • You could link to satirist as done in Mathias' article.

    I linked Satire instead. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

A few minor suggestions to begin with. I will take a look at the lead at the end. MSincccc (talk) 12:05, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey MSincccc, just checking whether you have had the time to take at look at other parts of the article. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I have not had much time yet, as I still have Rain World's FAC to conclude, along with some commitments both on- and off-wiki. However, I expect to leave a few more comments by tomorrow. MSincccc (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Mind-body dualism

• objects but also contents of consciousness, including cognitions and emotions.
  • I remember how "cognitions" was noted at the Cognition FAC. Drop the "s"?

    Done. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

• a mental pain experience,
  • How about "an experience of mental pain" or you might even rephrase it?

    Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

• explaining how or why the two separate realms are synchronized
  • Do we need to mention "separate"?

    Removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 16:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Religious dualisms

• "principles or personified as rivaling deities" → "principles or personified as rival deities"

  Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

• "the good as the singular foundational principle" → "the good as a singular foundational principle"

  I think "the" is better to emphasizes that there is only one. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

• helping popularize the term
  • How about "helping to popularize"?

    Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

• forces that are actively in conflict with each other
  • We could drop "that are".

    Removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

• As interdependent forces, neither one is ranked above the other.
  • Do we need "one"?

    Removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 07:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Platonic dualism

• None here except a few stylistic suggestions.

MSincccc (talk) 09:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Epistemological dualism

• "perception is not directly in touch with the world" → "perception is not in direct contact with the world"
  • A suggestion.

    Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• which represent or stand for those objects but are not identical to them
  • Do we need "stand for" here?

    Removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Other forms

• "in the field of metaphysics" → "in metaphysics"

  Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Criticisms

• However, some arguments seek to undermine dualism as a whole
  • Do we need "as a whole" here?

    It's not necessary, but I think it's helpful to emphasize the contrast to specific types of dualism. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• "general patterns found in most or all of its forms"

→ "general patterns in most or all of its forms"

• • A minor suggestion.

    Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

History

• The link to Pythagoreanism might confuse readers into thinking it is about his followers rather than his and his followers' ideas.

  I think it's close enough in this context to avoid WP:EASTEREGG. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• Is the Is–ought problem different from Hume's law?

  I think for the context here, we can treat them as synonyms. I adjusted the formulation. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

• "challenged that forms have independent existence"

→ "challenged the view that forms have independent existence"

• • More idiomatic?

    Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• "a family of views proposing a fundamental division"

→ "a family of views that propose a fundamental division"

• Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• That's all from me. This one came across as a bit shorter than your previous FAC submissions, but then again, it explains a lot too well to be rephrased now. MSincccc (talk) 06:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

  I appreciate all the helpful suggestions! I hope I didn't miss any. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

  It has taken a bit longer, apologies for having forgotten it briefly due to everything else that's going on.

  Happy to support. MSincccc (talk) 09:18, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Source review

I'll do a source review for this. Shapeyness (talk) 03:11, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• I did spotchecks for the good article nomination and found no issues with source-text integrity, close paraphrasing, or plagiarism.
• There are some url= that I think should be chapter-url=

  Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Some Google Books links have an access date, others don't

  Since they are typically offline books, I think none should have access dates. I removed them. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Some SEP links have access date, others don't

  As online articles, I think all should have access dates. I added them. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Fontaine 2023 should be in title case

  Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Gerson 1986 - doi not found

  Fixed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Hill 2019 - I think the date should be 2008 (per title and copyright in frontmatter), also I think this should maybe be cited as a journal article (link to journal special issue here)

  I changed the date and used the journal template instead. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Kissi, Dompere Kofi (2017) I believe should be Dompere, Kofi Kissi (2017) - I'm not very aware of the publisher but it seems ok here

  Fixed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Rich 2017 - this is a reliable source but I think for FA I would want sources within academic philosophy to satisfy HQRS for philosophy content

  I replaced it with a better source. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

• Sahakian 1974 - I wasn't sure about Barnes & Noble as a publisher here, but it appears to be part of a university textbook series and the author looks all ok, plus it is used in a citation with plenty of other supporting sources so I think this is fine
• All other sources used are HQRS

  Hi Shapeyness, thank you for taking care of the source review! I addressed your points, I hope I didn't miss anything. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

  @Phlsph7: I made some small changes, I think the new Blackburn source needs a page range. Shapeyness (talk) 12:56, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

  The changes look good. I added the page information for Blackburn. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:14, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks Phlsph7, the source review is a pass. I also support this article for FA based on my assessment at GAN; the only things I noticed then that would hold it back from FA were source-related issues that have now been resolved. Shapeyness (talk) 12:02, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for the support and all the help with the GA review and the source review! Phlsph7 (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 08:57, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• As an initial comment, I would suggest adding the relevant language template ("Use ... English"). MSincccc (talk) 09:02, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for looking! Done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

History (Background)

• You could link to Pentecost and Easter.

  done --GA

• It is unclear, if he possessed
  • The comma could be dropped here.

    done --GA

History (Readings and text)

• which is used for six consecutive movements (5 to 10) of the work in eleven movements
  • Could this be rephrased to avoid repeating "movements"?

    perhaps but I didn't find an easy solution, - perhaps drop the eleven, - that was said before? --GA

• "from the gospel" → "from the Gospel"

  done --GA

• both an idea from Psalm 68...and its quotation in the Epistle to the Ephesians
  • "both" is redundant with "and".

    yes but should stress two things to come --GA

History (Performance)

• Another performance by Bach is documented by a violin part, but cannot be dated.
  • "but cannot be dated" → "but it cannot be dated"

    if you say so --GA

• performed the cantata's first part in Halle at least twice
  • You could move "at least twice" earlier for flow.

    yes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 10:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Music

• Bach structured the cantata in eleven movements, in two parts.
  • Do we need the comma or could it be dropped?

    Most cantatas are not in two parts, - intended to give it more weight. --GA

• "nothing that follows can balance" → "nothing that follows can balance it"

  "which" is what nothing can balance --GA

• Due to the long text, the work unusually features rather short arias and five recitatives
  • Drop "rather"?

    if you think so --GA

• "refers in the end to the view towards heaven" → "ultimately refers to the view towards heaven"

  "at the end"? - the end of the movement is meant --GA

• "like in Bach's Orchestral suites" → "as in Bach's Orchestral suites"

  yes --GA

• notes that the soprano and alto lines were too low for trumpets to play along, and that Dürr suggested that trumpeters played violins for that movement
  • How about dropping "that" before Dürr?

    would mean something different, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  You might retain the "that". It was only meant as a suggestion of the clarity would not be affected. MSincccc (talk) 04:40, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 15:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• Gerda Arendt That's all from me. Feel free to ping if you intend to expand the prose later. MSincccc (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  I've responded to you above.

  A fine article indeed and I will support the nomination. Good luck with it. MSincccc (talk) 04:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Noleander

• Critical reception/assessment? - I don't see any material about how the cantata is assessed by critics, either back in the 1700s, or in the modern era. Can such information be included in the article? Alternatively, if the cantata is unremarkable and not considered special in any way, readers will want to know that also ... are there any sources that would support such a statement?

  Critical reception of church music was not existent at the time. (Even today, it would be rare, especially of a piece meant to be performed only once, or a few more times.) Only when he took the post was noted in the press, and without a remark about the music. All works by Bach are notable, just by being by Bach. --GA

  I understand that all works of his are notable. But readers will want to know: "Are there any music scholars (of any era) that have performed an analysis of this cantata? What attributes do they ascribe to the cantata? How do they describe its musical qualities (tone, harmony, etc)? When scholars compare it to other cantatas of Bach, what do they say? Relative to Bach's other cantatas, is there any data that gives readers an idea of its popularity (e.g. frequency of performance/recording; or rating by notable musicians or scholars)? Noleander (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  To be more specific: the article already has some analysis by musicologists, for example "Joachim Schulze notes that the "energetic repeated pitches, spacious broken chords, and sweeping passages" give the aria a heroic character, although the triple meter might indicate a dance type" ... there are a handful of these that are commenting on a specific movement, but I don't see any that address the entire cantata. For example, the Dürr source has these notes on BWV 43:

  • "The text of this cantata is unorthodox in form, for it consists largely of a poem in six strophes (nos. 5–10). The explanation for this has been uncovered by the American Bach scholar William H. Scheide..."
  • "The New Testament words, Mark 16.19, are drawn from the Gospel for Ascension Day, and the following strophic poem :: and the defeat of Satan, leading to the hope that the Saviour will prepare for me, too, a dwelling in heaven. "
  • "In its festive scoring for three trumpets and drums, two oboes, strings, and continuo, "
  • "... it is exceeded a little only by the Ascension Oratorio among Bach’s works for this occasion. "
  • " This cantata leaves behind a somewhat mixed impression... "
  • "The extensive text may explain a certain brevity—even scantiness—in its setting, which is reflected in the short arias and no fewer than four plain secco recitatives. Only the opening chorus forms an exception. "
  • "... perhaps Johann Sebastian here modelled himself consciously on a work by his cousin Johann Ludwig. "

  Other sources on BWV 43 that might have insights that readers would benefit from include:

  • Simon Crouch has a essay on BWV 43 here. Crouch is quoted in WP in Schlage doch, gewünschte Stunde, BWV 53
  • Julian Mincham has a essay on BWV 43 here. Mincham is quoted in many WP Bach articles including GA Gottes Zeit ist die allerbeste Zeit, BWV 106

  Granted, these latter two sources are not as famous as Dürr, but they are quoted in other WP articles. Noleander (talk) 19:27, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  The bolded Dürr facts are all in Text and/or Movements (the summary right under that title, cantata as a whole), afaik, and some also in the lead. Why would they be in the body twice? Mincham was rejected as not a RS (by Brian Boulton), and is available as external link, as also Traupmann-Carr who had something special to offer to the Christmas Cantata BWV 110, but less so in this case. I'll check Crouch. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  I believe Classical Net was also among the unwanted self-published sources, and the short writing also provides nothing new. "Time constraint" is nonsense, - Bach wasn't obliged to write this cantata at all, - he could have used his cousin's work as on 18 other occasions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  One voice that I usually quote is Gardiner who recorded all church cantatas over 2000 Bach Cantata Pilgrimage, but not this one then (too much noise in the live recording), but later. I tried to access the liner notes, but no luck here, nor on the Bach-Cantatas site. Can you perhaps see something there? - Another resource of commentary is the Netherlands Bach Society, but they haven't recorded this cantata yet. Other sources would be the Swiss project of Lutz, but it's a spoken lecture in German, and a MDR broadcast, same. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

• ... are marked by green background under the header ... - WP:COLOR suggests that the article cannot use color alone to convey information. The table is okay, because it has the word "period" (in addition to the green color). Perhaps the "key" in the body text can also focus on the word "period" rather than the color?

  In earlier versions (of other cantatas), there were two colours and different texts within both. --GA

  The WP:COLOR says that WP articles should not rely on colors to convey information to readers, because some may be color blind. So, better would be ... are marked by the word "Period" in the Instr. column ... or ... are marked by the word "Period" and the color green in the Instr. column ... Noleander (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  adopting --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• Single paragraph? The final movement "11" at Gott_fähret_auf_mit_Jauchzen,_BWV_43#11 is the only movement with 2 paragraphs. Will some readers think the 2nd paragraph is a summary or conclusion to the "Movements" section (which has an intro paragraph at the top)? Even I'm not 100% sure if the 2nd paragraph is a summary of the whole cantata or not; I'm guessing it is not because the content doesnt read like a summary. But I had to stop and ponder. Consider merging the two paragraphs.

  A summary is rather given on top, right under Movements. I wonder why a reader would expect one under header 11. The instruments seem a completely different topic from where this music came from. I hope for a Lilypond rendering between the two paras, - is that possible, Michael? --GA

• Alt text missing in some images:
  • "Duke Ernst Ludwig"
  • InfoBox image

    done, sorry for the omission --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• Source: orig vs translation? The source Schulze, Hans-Joachim (4 April 2024). "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN 9780252056703. seems to have several editions:
  1. 2006 Original German edition
  2. 2024 English translation by Univ of Illinois Press
  3. Digital "companion" to the 2024 English translation
  • Suggest clarifying by:
    • a) use "language" and the "trans-title" fields to identify original language; and use "translator-first/last" fields identify the English translator; and "orig-year" field to display "2006".
    • b) I cannot tell if (2) and (3) are the same book with same ISBN. If they are distinct, the source details should clearly identify one vs the other.
    • c) Is publisher Windsor & Downs Press? or Univ of Illinois?

  Thank you for the details. FAs BWV 249 and BWV 110 have the kind of "abridged" version, but why not improve, for those readers who can deal with the original title? I can't answer b) and c). Otherwise taken. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I'm still a bit confused. The citation should describe the edition that the editor read (not the edition that is recommended for readers). If the editor read the German edition, the cite should be something like: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (2006) "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Die Bach-Kantaten: Einführung zu sämtlichen Kantaten Johann Sebastian Bachs, Evangelische Verlagsanstalt (in German). ISBN ... If the editor read the English 2024 version, the cite should be something like: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (2024) [2006] "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach . Translated by Brokaw II, James A. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN ... The cite now is a mixture of the 2006 German and 2024 English editions: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (4 April 2024) [2006]. "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Die Bach-Kantaten: Einführung zu sämtlichen Kantaten Johann Sebastian Bachs [Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach] (in German). Translated by Brokaw II, James A. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN ..... The cite should describe only the edition that the editor read (the other edition can be mentioned in "Further Reading" section; or in parenthesis after the "main" edition). Noleander (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood your earlier comment. Trying again. As the German version is not online, and most readers will not be able to read it any, no further reading. They will find it when reading about the author. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

• Source titles should use a consistent algorithm for capitalization (per WP:CITEVAR as of 2025. Article has mixture:
  • The compositional process of J. S. Bach: A study of the autograph scores of the vocal works.
  • Johann Sebastian Bach: The Learned Musician
  • Ignore how the sources capitalize their own titles. Noleander (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

    I changed the book title. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• "Bach composed rather few cantatas during his third ..." The phrase "rather few" sounds wrong to my American ears. Consider "few" or "relatively few" or ".. fewer cantatas in his third year than in the prior years ...".

  well, it was rather dramatic (every (weekly) occasion here, three months without any there), and "few" seems too little, - suggestions? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  It depends on what the sources say. Why are they saying "few"? Are they emphasizing that Bach's productivity slowed down in his 3rd year (vs years 1 and 2)? Why did he slow down? Health reasons? Busy with other obligations? Bored with the cantata format? I have not read the sources, so I cannot give concrete suggestions ... it depends on what the sources are trying to tell their readers. Noleander (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  I consider "few". Speculations about why are not in the sources, and wouldn't matter much for this cantata anyway. Bach's first two cycles (imagine the immense stress they must have meant for him and the musicians: a weekly world premiere of a 20-minutes piece, and daily for the high holidays) are mentioned in Background. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• Clarify "cycle" vs "year" for groups of cantatas. The article uses the words "cycle" and "year" in a way that may confuse readers that are not experts. Some readers will assume that cycle 1 = year 1, cycle 2= year 2, etc. I'm not sure how they correlate. I see that "cycle 3" redirects to Church cantatas of Bach's third to fifth year in Leipzig. So maybe it is:
  • cycle 1 = year 1
  • cycle 2 = year 2
  • cycle 3 = years 3,4,5
    • In any case, readers will want clarity on how year # relates to cycle #

      Well, this is so, because Bach composed fewer cantatas, and it took longer to have something for at least more occasions than the few from the third year. But as we are in the third year and the third cycle, it's still as expected, no? - It crossed my mind (before you asked) to change that linked article to a table sortable by both performance date and occasion, - I'll see ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

      Thanks for the information. My point is that non-musician readers coming to this article will get confused by the terms such as "3rd year" or "3rd cycle". Bach experts have no confusion. It will help readers if the article provides a brief note helping readers associate cycles to year. For example, a small "efn" footnote could describe how years map to cycles. Noleander (talk) 16:08, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

      well, this is new, - in previous articles people seemed to have understood that in his first year on the post he wrote the first cycle of cantatas, and in his second year the second cycle, and in his third year the third cycle. I believe that Background says that, no? "Year" doesn't mean calendar year (but 12 months), because he took office in the middle of the year, but that is said as well. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• Sources are grouped into three groups:
  • Bach Digital (a single source)
  • Sources by author
  • Other sources
    • It is odd that "Bach Digital" gets its own group. Consider simplifying by combining "Bach Digital" into "Other sources"

      Bach Digital - as you may have seen - is The source, not any other. Compare other FAs such as Easter Oratorio (where admittedly there are many more under the header) --GA

• Capitalization in table: "boy soloist of the Thomanerchor" - "Boy" should be capitalized (occurs twice)

  wouldn't that look like a soloist named Boy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  Perhaps that problem can be solved by re-wording to something like: Anonymous soprano from Thomanerchor or Unknown soprano from Thomanerchor or Anonymous boy soprano from Thomanerchor etc. - Noleander (talk) 16:10, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

  but we want to be concise in the table, - I'd rather have Boy. "boy" hasn't been a problem yet. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• 5 singers? The SWF recording in the table is: boy soloist of the Thomanerchor, Nobuko Gamo-Yamamoto, Annelies Westen, Horst Wilhelm, Dieter Slembeck It appears to be naming 5 people. All the other recordings have exactly 4 people. Is it correct?

  oh no, - thanks for catching that! - no boy in that recording, must have happened when copying. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

... in progress ... Noleander (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• "in two parts to be performed before and after the sermon."I might say "broken into two parts, performed before and after the sermon.

  "broken" sounds negative to me, how about "divided"? --GA

Fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

• "The poem may have existed separately, quoted by the librettist" I might add an "and is being" before the "quoted" (you may not need the comma in that case).

  We are in "may be" territory, and can't suddenly say "is". How is this: "The anonymous poem may have existed separately/previously, being quoted by the librettist"? - actually, we might also drop the whole "quoted" clause, because what else? --GA

I guess. Maybe ", and was quoted by the librettist"?

• "expresses that God makes the prisons captives,[1] in syllabic declamation.[14]" What does "the prisons captives" mean? It feels like there is either an apostrophe missing or an "s" surplus?

  Complicated. This is the translation of a paraphrase of a line in the Bible (of an originally Greek line), "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. The Biblical line was already mentioned in "Text" further up. The Baroque librettist paraphrased "captivity captive" as "prisons captive" (Da die Gefängnisse er selbst gefangen führt = "since he leads the prisons themselves as his captives", - this is the Dellal tranlation, while Jones stayed in his less literal translation closer to the Bible, which means closer to the Greek. We could do the same. What do you think? --GA

That's fine.

That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for looking! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:37, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Support--Wehwalt (talk) 18:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Pokelego

I will leave some comments sometime in the next few days. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:33, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

• "Season two was also noted for its positive economic impact in Montana and Texas, and set viewership records" Perhaps re-word this? The viewership records should either be a separate sentence or have changed wording, since it doesn't have a lot to do with the economic impact.

• Done

• Not super familiar with this kind of cast list formatting, but do cast lists need to be cited when done like this?

• Sourced the main cast primarily for the roles. The guest cast, along with the roles they play, appear in the closing credits of the episodes themselves. They should therefore be covered by the same concept as WP:CITEPLOT/WP:PLOTSOURCE I believe, in that the work itself serves as a primary source.

• Would it be possible to give some kind of synopsis of season 1 prior to the episode list? As someone who's never watched the show it's very confusing since I have no idea who these characters are or how they got into these situations initially.

• In a broader sense, the two seasons are connected closely enough that the brief premise given in the lead is essentially that of the first season as well (obviously just without going into much detail). I did attempt to briefly elaborate in the episode table here and there (why the Dutton ranch is having financial issues, why Zane and Alice are in jail, Teonna's situation and the fact that Spencer and Alex are separated is already mentioned). If you truly think it needs it, I could add a more in-detailed plot of season 1, although I'm not aware of any other featured season list that does and I'm not sure if it would be out of scope for this page?

• "In the series' final scene, however, they reconnecting once more, this time in an afterlife" Typo here. Also not sure if in "Despite the title of the series, the end of the second season extends into 1924" 1924 is meant to be italicized or not.

• Done on the first part. 1924 is not meant to be italicized as it refers to a year/setting, not a work.

• "Roché said he had mixed emotions filming this scene because, although violent, he believed it was well-composed." Not quite sure this sentence is needed, since it doesn't really add much and is a bit confusing.

• Removed

• "Photorealistic creature work was done by Rodeo FX, who created a wolf and a mountain lion; Folks VFX, who added elk; and Outpost VFX, who was responsible for cattle." Commas should be used instead of semi-colons here, since the bits after them are not independent clauses.

• Done

• What are the reliabilities of JoBlo Movie Network and The Playlist? I would also advise removing Screen Rant, since WP:VALNET sources are considered low quality for usage in FAC.

• ScreenRant removed. For JoBlo, there's an about page that clearly lists editorial oversight and (albeit brief), a history of the site. There's been little discussion about it at RSP over the years, but I can see it's been used in several promoted FA's within the last five years (RoboCop, Saving Private Ryan, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, and John Wick), which I believe speaks to it's reliability.

The Playlist similarly has an about page, that mentions an editorial process. The author of the article this page is citing is the editor and chief. Additionally, that author has written for SPIN Magazine, MTV News, and IndieWire has covered both the site, and quoted the author at which point (if the about wasn't convincing enough), we'd likely be approaching subject matter expert territory.

• For the multiple citations attributed to the Whitfield storyline, I'd insert the multiple citations after the first sentence, and then distribute relevant citations after the particular reviewers for proper attribution.

• Done

@TheDoctorWho: Mostly some minor comments, but this is the bulk of my comments. I'd also go through and make sure you're careful about tensing, since I noticed the article tends to hop between present and past tense a fair bit. Ping me when the above are addressed.

Thank you for the comments, should have time to get to these later today, tomorrow at the latest TheDoctorWho (talk) 10:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: I haven't checked for tensing yet, but I did address most of your comments. I left a few replies above just to see if it cleared up other concerns, or if not, for further input (mainly around plot and sources). TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho I think that should be everything addressed. Happy to Support since I trust the tensing issue will be addressed (And is not a super big deal all things considered). Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Nick-D

I reviewed this article's recent A-class nomination, and it seems to have been improved since. I'd like to offer the following comments:

• "carrying 5,000 different items, such as toilet paper" - suggest deleting everything after 'items' as this example seems oddly specific for the lead

  Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

  This doesn't seem to have been done? Nick-D (talk) 09:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• Marine divisions were authorized to have a shore party - suggest deleting "to have"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

• "but the United States military remained on the island" - in what capacity?

  The US Navy administered the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands until 1951. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

• Were any of the construction or logistics units deployed to the islands African-American units? This isn't noted at present if so, but would be worth noting given the racial policies of the time meant that it was the main way African Americans contributed to the Pacific War. Nick-D (talk) 04:46, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

  Yes. African-Americans served in base companies in the Pacific Area. An African-American sailor appears in the image at the top of the page. Two African-American Seabee units were organised: the 34th and 80th Naval Constriction Battalions but the 80th served in the Atlantic and the 34th on Guadalcanal and Okinawa. The Army's 1882nd Engineer Aviation Battalion served on Saipan in 1945. Race relations were very poor, as demonstrated by the Agana Race Riot. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Comments to follow. MSincccc (talk) 05:33, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Background

• You could link "amphibious operation" to amphibious warfare.

  Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

• On 24 July 1944, the 4th Marine Division landed on nearby Tinian
  • You could link to "Tinian" on first mention, and also to the Battle of the Philippine Sea.

    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

• "where there were two very small beaches that were lightly defended” → "where two very small beaches were lightly defended"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 05:47, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Naval logistics (Shipping)

• You could mention the full form of "LVTs" on first mention.

  Added link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

• "as were all but three of the auxiliary ships" → "as were all but three auxiliary ships"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

• "converted to use as an oil tanker" → "converted for use as an oil tanker"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

  • More idiomatic?
• Some units of the V Amphibious Corps and the XXIV Corps Artillery found themselves travelling separately from their unit equipment
• did not put any of their supplies on pallets at all
  • You could drop "at all".

    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

  • We could avoid repeating "units".

    Changed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

• "each type of supplies" → "each type of supply"

  tweaked wording. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Naval logistics (Food and water)

• "to provide water to smaller vessels lacking sufficient water storage" → "to provide water to smaller vessels lacking sufficient storage"

  Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

• "The 77th Infantry Division took with it 190,000 US gallons" → "The 77th Infantry Division took 190,000 US gallons"

  That could be ambiguous. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Naval logistics (Fuel)

• each of which had three oilers, escorted by at least two destroyers or destroyer escorts
  • You could drop the comma after "oilers".

    Dropped. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Naval logistics (Ammunition)

• You could link to War Shipping Administration.

  Already linked above. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 04:34, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Ship-to-shore

• The lead uses "LVT" without mentioning the full form whereas the body gives the full name (LVT) twice. How about doing so once each in the lead and body?

  Added to the lead; remove duplicate from the body. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:42, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• five days' of supply
  • Do we need the apostrophe here?

    The WikiGnomes are big on this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:42, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

• You could split a few of the longer sentences, but the section is otherwise fine as it is.

I intend to conclude the review by tomorrow. MSincccc (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Base development

• "so in order to not interrupt fighter operations" → "so as not to interrupt fighter operations"
• Maintenance Unit 515, arrived with the assault
  • Do we need the comma after "515"?

    Yes. Parenthetical comma. Could be replaced with parentheses if you think that would be better. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:03, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• The 7,000-by-150-foot (2,134 by 46 m) was sealed
  • A missing noun.

    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:03, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• North Field was commissioned on 3 February 1945,
  • Do we need the comma after "1945"?

    Yes. Conjunctive comma; two separate clauses. Commas are always required before a coordinating conjunction. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:03, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Guam hosted 100,000 Vietnamese refugees in 1975,
  • Similarly, could the comma after "1975" be dropped?

    Yes. Dropped. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:03, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• That's all from me; mostly minor suggestions I leave at your discretion. I look forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

  A fine read and well explained. I look forward to your next article, and I will support this nomination. MSincccc (talk) 07:45, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Dimitri Mascarenhas.jpg: the source of this file on Flickr explicitly says "all rights reserved". There does not appear to be any evidence to suggest User:Rka11111 is Richard Avis. I am tagging this as "no permission" on Commons.
• File:Yuvraj Singh bowling (cropped).jpg: OK
• File:Hampshire vs Sussex, 2009 Friends Provident Trophy, Lord's.jpg: OK

―Howard • 🌽³³ 21:48, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

How annoying. I'll remove the photo until it is confirmed, though I don't hold much hope - the uploader hasn't been active on Commons since 2011 and Flickr since 2014. AA (talk) 22:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

I've added an additional picture and used the |upright parameter to make the image a little bigger. There is another image option, though it is poorer detail. Both show the ground when Mascarenhas scored his first century, and before it was redeveloped and increased in size. AA (talk) 22:58, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Additional review:

File:England vs Sri Lanka.jpg: OK (source on Flickr says CC BY-NC, but a 2006 Commons reviewer confirmed it was CC BY at the time; I am therefore adding c:Template:Flickr-change-of-license). ―Howard • 🌽³³ 10:01, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Comments to follow. MSincccc (talk) 03:52, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Early life

• When he was a child, his parents emigrated again, to Melbourne in Australia.
  • Drop the comma?

• Done. Second comma? If so, removed. AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• His father ran a chain of successful fast-food restaurants there
  • You could drop "there".

• Done. No need for "there" there! AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• You could mention Trinity College, Perth in full for clarity.

• Done. AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• You could drop the link to "batting".

• Done. Yeah. not sure that needed linking. AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• having been impressed by him.
  • You could drop this phrase, since the previous clause already formed this idea.

• Done. Much more succinct now. AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "fostering ambitions" → "with ambitions"

• Done. Less "clunky" with your suggestion. AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Well, we finally have a modern-day cricketer at FAC. How about Stokes, Buttler, Bethell, Root or Brook in future?

• Comment. Oooooh I dunno, I'm strictly a Hampshire man :D Maybe Warne, Pietersen, Carberry, Vince for modern Hampshire players! AA (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 07:25, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Cricket career (Early years)

• "He played minor counties cricket for Dorset in 1996" → "He played minor counties cricket for Dorset that year"

• Done. Yep, no need to repeat "1996"! AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Linking "7/64" to Five-wicket haul could mislead the surface reader to think that the figure itself had an article on it.

• Done. Does seem to fall under WP:PIPE, so delinked. AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• with Mascarenhas claiming 16 wickets in his first two matches.
  • Wouldn't "taking" be more natural and common among general readers?

• Done. Yeah, reads much more naturally to the reader, changed! AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "he was afflicted with a back injury" → "he suffered a back injury" (A suggestion)

• Done. Much less clunky of a word. AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• and with the bat scored 645 runs at an average of 28.04,
  • How about dropping "with the bat"?

• Done. AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Apart from Early years which is a level-3 heading, all others are level-4, causing them to come under "Early years". I suppose that's not your intention.

• Done. Thanks for spotting that, wasn't my intention! Now fixed. AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Could we include at least one picture of Mascarenhas in the article? No worries, if not (since I did not come across any on Commons).

• Comment. I was surprised there are no pictures of him freely avaliable. Annoying the original photo in the infobox seems to have been uploaded by someone who nicked the photo from elsewhere. I asked a few weeks back on WP:CRIC if anyone had photos of him, as some of the project members went to T20 finals day's in the early 2010s, but nobody responded to say they had any :( AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

First century

• His Championship appearances were limited by a back injury sustained in a Championship match in May, keeping him out throughout June.

• Done. Second use of "Championship" removed. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• • You could avoid repeating "Championship" in the sentence.
• He was appointed Hampshire's T20 captain in 2007
  • Do we need more than two links to "captain" (one each in the lead and article body)?

• Comment. I tend to treat the lead and article as two separate entities that compliment one-another. I tend to link important terms in the lead, especially here with Mascarenhas having been Hampshire's captain. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "taking one five-wicket haul" → "including a/one five-wicket haul"

• Done. Have linked five-wicket haul a in the prior paragraph. And have reworded this part to now say "taking five wickets in an innings against Yorkshire in the County Championship in May." as there were three occurrences of "five-wicket haul" within a few sentences. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "top-score" "top score"

• Done. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "in a 46 runs victory" → "in a 46-run victory"

• Done. Good spot, corrected. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• average of exactly 25
  • Do we need "exactly"?

• Done. Nah, I don't think we do! Have removed. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "a second placed finish" → "a second-place finish"

• Done. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• Do we have finer alternatives for title of this sub-section?

• Done. Funny you mention this. I have been unhappy with that sub-section title for a while, been bugging me. He really becomes established as Hampshire's main all-rounder during the period the section covers, so I have gone with "Established all-rounder". How does that sound? AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

International debut

• with his all-round performance in the first of 31 runs from 14 balls, including four consecutive sixes from Jeetan Patel's bowling,[67] and 2 for 19 from 4 overs contributing to England's victory by 32 runs and earning him man-of-the-match.
  • You could rephrase this to make it easier for a general reader to understand.

• Done. How does this read now? "He played in both T20I matches that opened the series. In the first, he scored 31 runs from 14 balls, hitting four consecutive sixes off Jeetan Patel's bowling, and took 2 for 19 from 4 overs. His all-round performance earned him man-of-the-match in England's 32-run victory."

Twenty20 revolutionary

• Mascarenhas played for the Rajasthan Royals in the 2010 IPL season, but injured his Achilles in his second match against Delhi Daredevils, forcing him to return home from the tournament;[85] this caused him to miss the beginning of the English season and ruled him out of the 2010 World Twenty20, having been named in the initial 30-man squad.
  • You could split this sentence.

• Done. Reads much better with the removal of the semi-colon. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "taking 5 wickets at an average of 30.40" → "taking five wickets at an average of 30.40"

• Done. Not sure why I haven't! AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• • It's more common to spell the number if it's under ten.

• Done. Not sure why I haven't! AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "expletive laden Tweet" → "expletive-laden tweet"

• Done. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• You could link to this article.

• Done. Nice suggestion, wasn't aware this page existed! AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "He had nursed torn tendons" → "He nursed torn tendons"

• Done. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "defeat to Lancashire" → "defeat by Lancashire"

• Done. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "During the course of the competition" → "During the competition"

• Done. Much more succinct and reads much more nicely. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Retirement

• "In July, Mascarenhas had announced" → "In July, Mascarenhas announced"

• Done. "Had" removed. AA (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Playing style and statistics

• I would suggest converting this into a section itself rather than including it under Career as has been done for many players.

• Done. This actually makes more sense as a separate on reflection. AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "being able to score quickly to accelerate the total" → "being able to score quickly to accelerate the scoring"

• Done. Better wording and flow as a result. AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "which assisted with accelerating an innings" → "which helped to accelerate an innings"

• Done. Much better choice of word. AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "remaining so until" → "remaining so until it was"

• Done. AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

• "inclusive of T20Is" → "including T20Is"

• Done. Better wording for sure. AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

AssociateAffiliate I look forward to your response and intend to conclude my review soon. I hope that my comments so far have been helpful, and I have made a few minor revisions along the way. MSincccc (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Coaching

• "choosing not to renew his contract for a second season" → "choosing not to renew his contract"
  • Simpler?

• Done. Much simpler, much more concise! AA (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Personal life

• None, except optional stylistic tweaks.

• Comment. Be nice to have less "Mascarenhas" in that section, but probably unavoidable given that Warne and Hurley are mentioned in prior sentences, so "he" wouldn't be correct to use. AA (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• That's all from me. MSincccc (talk) 06:45, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, much appreciated. One or two things happening over the next few days, but will attempt to work my way through! Cheers again, AA (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

@MSincccc found myself having some spare time this evening, so have gone through your comments. Please find above my responses, and thanks again for taking the time to review :) AA (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

@AssociateAffiliate I will support the nomination. It would be great to have a T20 era player reach featured status. MSincccc (talk) 04:50, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your support and taking the time to review. I wonder if we have any T20 era players that are FAs... I count four on this list (Collingwood, Gilchrist, Kieswetter, Trescothick). AA (talk) 20:08, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Michael Aurel

Here from my talk page. I'll confess that I've never warmed much to the T20 format, but as an Australian I can hardly say no to a bit of Shane Warne. At first glance, this looks like another nicely put together cricket biography. I'll get started on my review soon. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:17, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Volcano_Misti,_Peru.jpg: OK
• File:Peru physical map.svg: OK
• File:P1020738 El Misti Krater.jpg: The file is oddly formatted; for one it gives "Peru" as the source of the image instead of "own work", and it gives the name of "R.D. Hoogendoorn" as the author instead of the username. Nevertheless, it is not unheard of for some Commons users to insert their real names as author on Commons as opposed to their username. Given that it has intact EXIF data and I couldn't find an earlier instance of this image through reverse image searching, I'm inclined to believe this is an own work of User:Mrbold and he just decided to credit his real name. I advise changing the source from "Peru" to c:Template:Own.
• File:Ubinas and Misti.jpg: OK
• File:El Misti Volcano and Arequipa, Peru.jpg: confirmed as NASA work, but add this archive url to the source as it is currently a dead link.
• File:Volcán Misti desde Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 03.JPG: OK
• File:Ausangate-hillside-MT.jpg: OK
  • Looking closer on this one, it lacks alt text and needs to have alt text added at Module:Portal/images/a. However, this can only be edited by a template editor. Either edit it yourself if you have the rights or submit an edit request. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:05, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

―Howard • 🌽³³ 21:31, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Fixed the images. Going by the mentions of ALT text at Template talk:Portal I doubt that there'll be consensus to add ALT text to these modules. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

That is acceptable to me. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 13:27, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Noleander

• The previous nomination was archived on 17 Jan 2026. A log of the changes to the article since then is here. That change log shows a new source, and quite a bit of copy editing.

• I reviewed this article in the prior nomination, and supported it then. Regardless, I'll review it again here, from a fresh perspective.

• Looking at the prior FAC nomination, there were two "cannot support" reviews, from User:Esculenta: and User:RoySmith. Both gave prose quality as an explanation, saying it was "prose to be clunky and not of a professional standard" and "I find the overall style to not meet WP:FACR’s 'engaging' requirement". So, I'll try to focus on that.

• "Show Ref Check" tool shows that some books include location/city datum, some do not. This is not a showstopper for FA, just an observation.

  Standardized location. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Should wikilink "Condesuyos" to Condesuyos province

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Consider adding Misti to the list of hausbergs in Hausberg article. Not required for FA.

  Did it anyway. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• The following are some sentences in the article that perhaps could be improved:

• Misti is considered one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world, as it lies only 12 kilometres (7.5 mi) from Arequipa. The city's population exceeds one million people... - Some readers may think the word "dangerous" by itself means the volcano has killed large numbers of people in the past. Is it better to say "potentially dangerous" or "potentially deadly" or something like that? *: I am not sure that most people would make that assumption. Also, if my understanding is correct, one shouldn't use templates like {{green}} in FAC as it can break the WP:PEIS limit Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

  Yeah, the FAC template/PEIS rules are pretty confusing. I think the FAC page says that color templates are acceptable: "For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are ... templates such as Template:green that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts." If I'm interpreting that wrong, let me know. Noleander (talk) 13:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

  @FAC coordinators: JoJo Eumerus mobile (main talk) 08:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

• ... the mummies on Misti form the largest known Inca human sacrifice. The word "largest" is a bit ambiguous: By volume? By hectares? By body count? Do the sources suggest a more precise word that would eliminate all ambiguity?

  Body count, I don't know of any better word but then English isn't my first language. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• It is unclear whether the Inca were the first Altiplano political entities to influence the region or whether previous cultures played a role. Phrase "political entities" sounds odd in that first location. Consider "culture", or "civilization", or "peoples" And "influence" is very vague: what exactly are the sources trying to say? Is it Scholars are not certain if the Inca were the first peoples to settle in the region around Misti. or Scholars are not certain if the Inca were the first civilization to inhabit the region around Misti.  ?

  Went with civilizations. Narrowing down "influence" probably isn't going to work; even Love 2017 doesn't specify that much. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• A second station ("Mt. Blanc Station") was after 1888 built at the volcano’s base; Grammar seems wrong there ... unless that is some British dialect I'm not familiar with. My ears want to hear "was built sometime after 1888".

  Recast this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• A range of distances, with two units: extends for roughly 1,000 kilometres (620 mi)-1,500 kilometres (930 mi) The Template:convert template includes a built-in range feature, described here that should automatically display a more elegant pattern like 1,000 –1,500 km (620 –930 miles) . The latter is a lot better for readers, in my opinion.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• n-dash vs hyphen? Same sentence as above: MOS:RANGE says to use a n-dash (not hyphen) for number ranges. If you use the Template:convert template range feature, it displays the n-dash automatically.

  Is there a script that can do that change? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• The volcano is about 20 kilometres (12 mi) wide[70] and rises abruptly[i] from the surrounding terrain. The footnote [i] says: The volcano rises about 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) above Arequipa. Would the footnote be better in the body text? The sentence could simply state the width & height of the volcano in km.

  Did the recast. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Continuing with the above sentence: The word "abrupt" is vague & ambiguous in this context. Does it mean steep? The slope was presented above as only 30%. Does it mean "tall"? Abrupt not a good word for "tall". Does it means that there is a cliff or escarpment at the base of the volcano? If so, say so. Consider eliminating the word "abrupt" or add words explaining precisely what is meant.

  "Abruptly" in the sense that it's not a gentle ascent, but a sudden transition in slope/terrain. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• The snowline lies above the summit. During December–August, snow can cover an area of 1–7 square kilometres... The word "snowline" is ambiguous .. it can mean the current (today) snowline, which varies a lot; or it can mean the permanent snowline (above which is snow-covered all year). From context, I'm guessing this article means "permanent snowline" ... but why make the reader do that work? Consider re-wording to simply say There are no permanent snowfields on Misti. During December–August, snow can cover an area ...

  Expanded this a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• List of recent eruptions: Radiocarbon dating has identified eruptions 8,140, 6,390, 5,200, 4,750, 3,800 and 2,050 years ago; the 3,800 eruption deposited fallout on Nevado Mismi more than 90 kilometres (56 mi) northwest of Misti. The Global Volcanism Program lists eruptions in 310 BCE ± 100 years, 2230 BCE ± 200 years, 3510 BCE ± 150 years, 4020 BCE ± 200 years, 5390 BCE ± 75 years and 7190 BCE ± 150 years. This uses two units of time: "years ago" and BCE. That is not helpful for readers. If the sources use two units of time, readers will want the WP editors to convert to a single unit. (Exception: times long ago may use different units than recent times ... but this green text above is only a single span of time).

  I must confess that I don't remember the conversion formula. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Continuning with the above: I'm confused why the "Radiocarbon dating" gives on list of eruptions, and Global Volcanism Program gives another list. If there is an important reason why the two lists are different, the article should explain. If there is no good reason, it is simply confusing to the reader: readers don't care what primary sources the WP editor relied on: just give us the summary information. If the two sources are both valid but came up with different sets of dates: just silently merge the two lists (and maybe discuss the two sources in a footnote).

  It's a pretty banal reason: Two distinct sources with different format. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Contradictory statements? Most sources state that there is no clear evidence of eruptions after the arrival of the Spaniards, while the Global Volcanism Program reports a last eruption in 1985 and INGEMMET says it's the third-most active volcano of Peru. Mudflows descended the southern valleys until the 17th century. The mountain is sometimes reported to be "smoking" at its summit, including water vapour clouds. Phreatic eruptions may have taken place in 1577, 2 May 1677, 9 July 1784, 28 July 1787 and 10 October 1787
  1. If "most sources" say no eruption, but only one (GVP) says there were ... readers don't want to know the identity of that one outlier source ... just say "most sources" and leave it at that.
  2. "INGEMMET says it's the third-most active volcano " is in the same sentence as "no clear evidence of eruptions", but "active" can mean just seismic activities and other stuff not qualifying as an eruption... why mix eruptions with activity in a single sentence? Consider separating into two sentences: eruptions & activity.

     That's a good point - but in this case, GVP (most important English language source on global volcanism, perhaps most important source on global volcanism period) INGEMMET (most important Spanish language and Peru-relevant source) and "most sources" are all relevant so we need to cite them all. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

  3. "Phreatic eruptions may have taken..." Here the article tells the reader that reliable sources state that eruptions are likely to have happened after the Spaniards arrived ... seems to contradict the "Most sources state that there is no clear evidence of eruptions after .." in the 1st sentence. If "Phreatic eruptions" are minor and don't qualify as "full" eruptions, okay, but that needs to be explained. Alternatively, if the article is trying to distinguish between "eruptions proven by solid evidence (none)" and "speculative eruptions that have poor/no evidence (several)", that is okay, but needs to be clarified.

     I am not sure that everyone regards phreatic eruptions as bona fide volcanic activity. And yes, they are hard to prove empirically but I don't have a source for that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• That's all I have for now. Noleander (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Moisejp

Hi Jo-Jo, I'll review this. I'll warn you my reviews aren't too speedy but I'll try not to be too slow either. ;-) It's late tonight so only time for a couple of things tonight that jumped out at me just now.

• The name "Misti" may derive from either Quechuan or Spanish. It means 'mixed', 'mestizo' or 'white' and may refer to the volcano's snow cover. Indigenous names include Putina,[1][2] meaning 'mountain that growls'[3] – You've got double quotes for "Misti" and single quotes for some other terms. Scanning down farther I see double quotes for "smoking" and "tornillos". Dunno if there are other instances of single or double, but please check.

  Aye, single quote for the translation and double quote for the technical term and/or quote, hence the discrepancy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

• "Misti is the hausberg (house mountain) of Arequipa,[14] features on its seal,[15] and the residents view themselves as the offspring of the mountain." Would be nice to use a parallel structure in this sentence. (Currently the second clause, separated by a comma from the first, carries over the subject from the first, but the third clause, also separated by a comma, introduces a new subject.) More to follow, thanks! Moisejp (talk) 07:26, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

  Don't think there is a better place for this, sorry. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc

• Comments to follow. MSincccc (talk) 05:42, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• As an initial comment, I would suggest adding the relevant language template ("Use ... English") to the mainspace. MSincccc (talk) 05:50, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 15:55, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Gameplay and premise

• You could link to Minigame and Level (video games).
• You could also link "main character" to protagonist.

• For both of these, I think this falls into MOS:OVERLINK and that most readers will know what these are without the link. Z1720 (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• It is a single-player 3D platform game in which the player controls several of the main characters from the television show to accomplish various goals.
  • You could simplify this sentence to ...where the player controls several main characters.... or similar versions.

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• The levels can be played in any order, but some more difficult ones must be unlocked first by completing tasks in earlier stages.
  • How about "Levels can be played in any order, but some must be unlocked by completing earlier tasks" or similar versions?

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

A few minor suggestions to begin with. More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 06:02, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Development and release

• You could link to tie-ins.

• I think that's another MOS:OVERLINK. Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• THQ created a multimillion-dollar marketing campaign for Search for Reptar, the second-biggest campaign of 1998 for a video game after The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time's campaign.
  • The repetition of "campaign" could be avoided.

• Two instances removed from this paragraph. Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• for all current and future game systems from Nintendo, Sony, and Sega.
  • Do we need to mention "game systems" or would "systems" alone suffice?

• I think the clarification is helpful here: some might think its for other media or entertainment systems (some sort of Rugrats cinematic universe or for other merchandising) so I'm OK with keeping "game"

• The game was also designed to appeal to fans of the television series with level ideas inspired by television episodes.
  • The repetition of "television" could be avoided.

• I'm not sure how to do this. Ideas? Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• "features voice actors from the cartoon that reprise their roles" → "features voice actors from the cartoon who reprise their roles"

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• "distributed among kiosks, hardware pack-ins, and on" → "distributed via/through kiosks, hardware pack-ins, and on" (avoids the lack of parallel structure)

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• the younger children's market
  • Both "younger" and "children's" feel a bit redundant.

• Removed. Z1720 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 06:18, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Reception

• Reviewers stated that the game had an easy difficulty rating appealing to a younger audience, while older players, especially those who were fans of the television show or casual gamers, could enjoy the game[4][3][19][20] but might lose interest after quickly mastering the game's mechanics.
  • This sentence could be split.

• I split this and rearranged some text. Z1720 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• You could link to game mechanics.

• Another MOS:OVERLINK concern. Z1720 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• "sometimes the camera angle, when entering a room, would cause the controls to reverse"

→ "sometimes entering a room caused the camera angle to reverse controls"

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

MSincccc (talk) 16:43, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Bottom line

• That's all from me. I look forward to your thoughts and I hope my suggestions have been helpful. MSincccc (talk) 16:55, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• @MSincccc: Suggestions were very helpful. Comments above and ready for a re-review. Z1720 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• It was well-received commercially and was the third-best-selling game in the first two weeks of its release.
  • Doesn't "third best-selling" imply commercial success?