Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Defense of Sihang Warehouse/archive1

Defense of Sihang Warehouse

Self-nomination. A highly detailed account of a little-known (to the western world) battle. As such, a WP:CSB work. It has been peer reviewed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history, archive is here.

Support as nom. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 04:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I read this when it was a colloboration, and I thought it was excellent. Raul654 04:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, a high standard article of its kind. Well done! --Ter e nc e Ong 05:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, the montage imgage needs updated copyright information and a fair use rationale.--nixie 05:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have updated the copyright tag to a more specific one and added rationale for each of the 3 component images. (Image) -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 07:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add some artist details to Image:Sihang painting.gif, as it is not actually possible to tell when the painting was made and by whom from the details currently given on the image page.--nixie 04:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First thing in the morning tomorrow. (10 hours later) I'm pretty sure the source is in one of the CDs of war photos I have, just give me some time to dig it out. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 09:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support.-- 陈鼎翔贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 07:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, excellent article; all the issues raised during the peer review have been resolved. Kirill Lok s h in 09:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Please remove an image jam. It is really annoying. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 10:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean there are too many photos? -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At present, there is some Anglicizing necessary. The content is very strong, but there are some idiomatic English expressions that need to be smoothed. If I have some time, I'll do a bit at a time, but I hope other editors will jump in as well ("show the League of Nations of China's determination even further" is such a case; it's just a question of getting the English idiom right). Geogre 11:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've done a copyedit and hopefully removed all the weird English. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I really like the article but there are a few rough spots. The lead needs to have dates added. The Background section jumps right into details without even mentioning the overall conflict (the Sino-Japanese War). As others have commented, there are a few spots where phrasing needs to be improved, such as "grabbed the attention" in the lead. --NormanEinstein 13:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dates have been included in the lead para and I've included a paragraph in the background section dealing with the start of the entire war. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support - fill in the red links! :)Featured articles don't have red links Judgesurreal777 15:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This is incorect - as I have said on this page before, red links are orthogonal to the purpose of being a featured article. They indicate direction for future work. Raul654 19:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As this article deals with a relatively obscure event in a continent that does not have a good coverage of Wikipedians, this is a case of systematic bias. I don't think that at this point we can utilise the same "no red links" criterion to judge this article. :( -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've gone back and looked through all the red links, some were really non-notable (at least given the current coverage of such articles) cases, and have been removed, others are notable and I've written stubs on them, still others I think are notable but I have not been able to find enough information to write an article about. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 09:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Fix the nationalism in some sentences (very sparse). Sure, the defenders were brave and all, but portray it as their cultural reception, because bravery is subjective, though achieveemnt militarily amazing. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 18:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I worried about POV too. Because I'm (of course) POV on this subject POV definitely creeped into the article. Kirill Lokshin pointed out some for me, and I tried my best to remove them all. I've removed all references to the "Heroes" that could be replaced with "troops", "soldiers", "battalion" etc. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional Support. The article is comprehensive in covering the defense in detail. However, for a FA candidate the article should also have a reference section that has the sources listed with publisher date/place along with ISBN if possible. This should be the case for book sources, but not necessarily for contemporary newspaper articles, since references for those are hard to come by. Other than this the article looks good. BlueShirts 22:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References have been updated with place of publishing, publisher and year of publication. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The article is very detailed and accurate. I support it with both of my hands up!Anthony Gao 02:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, with reservations. A suggestion - I know it's not required, which is why I am still supporting the nomination, but it might be a good idea to take some time and create a few of the articles that are currently red links on this page. It doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the article itself, but I do feel it's important to have useful links in featured articles. Even if you just write a few good stubs, it could get the ball rolling and eventually give more depth to the main article. Kafziel 14:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm too tired to write it again so please read my response to Judgesurreal777... :D -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 09:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean that the red links all needed to be removed, just that it would be good to start articles for them to get the ball rolling. It doesn't take much; I just created Order of Blue Sky and White Sun with Grand Cordon, so that's one less. (I just picked that one because it was a very long and noticeable red link.) It doesn't take long, and this article looks better for it. As I said, you are by no means required to do it, and my support will stand regardless. Kafziel 14:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support: Makes one think how global Wikipedia is in its coverage of well-known and obscure topics. However, either those scattered red links need to go, or they need to have articles created for them. --Slgrandson 04:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing here, it's more or less done, for details please look above. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 09:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support—Impressive. Tony
Support. No other remaining concerns, except a minor issue which I mentioned in the talk page that I expect to get rectified easily. Also, excision of the term "brave" was not what I intended, more of representing that as cultural perception, but either way goes. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 01:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will answer that on the talk page. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 09:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - fine job, can find no fault! --Loopy ^e 06:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]