The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 01:52, 24 January 2012 [1].

W. E. B. Du Bois[edit]

W. E. B. Du Bois (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Noleander (talk) 15:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is my pleasure to introduce W. E. B. Du Bois, a man who – despite of enormous obstacles – never gave up. Prior to submitting this nomination: (1) I read the FA criteria, (2) I read Tony1's prose suggestions; (3) the article went through the GA process; (4) the article went through a peer review; and (5) I monitored the discussions on the FAC page (and contributed to several) to observe issues which typically lead to failure. Thanks in advance for your consideration. --Noleander (talk) 15:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I've been watching this article since the GA review. This article covers an important topic in Sociology; current changes have brought the article to FA status. My only reservation would be on the use of endashes, but the MOS seems to allow endashes with spaces to be substituted for emdashes. Meclee (talk) 00:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, the MOS equally endorses ndashes (with spaces) or mdashes (without spaces). I just tossed a coin and went with the ndashes, but I have no strong preference. --Noleander (talk) 03:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments: I've just started reading and will add as I go along. Please feel free to ping me on my page with questions, or if I'm interrupted and don't get back here. In general I think this is very strong piece and nicely written. A few tiny nitpicks as I'm going along:

Done. I've removed the adjectives "moving and inspiring". Those words are a bit too subjective to be in the encyclopedia's voice. The import of the book is adequately described in the following sentences. I'm sure I could find a dozen notable reviewers that use similar terms (and attribute it to those reviewers), but that sort of subjective analysis is best left to the article dedicated to The Souls of Black Folk. --Noleander (talk) 01:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (spelling fix is done; waiting for more feedback on choppy-ness). --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MOS

The intention is to use ndashes with spaces. I'll double check to make sure the MOS is followed. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Endashes have spaces; emdashes don't. They looked like emdashes to me, but as I said it's sometimes hard for me to tell the difference. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. What happened was: I wrote the entire article with ndashes & spaces; and then just last week a well-meaning editor converted the spaces before the ndashes to non-breaking spaces (which is an okay thing to do); but at the same time they converted the ndashes to mdashes, which was a mistake. I didn't notice the mdashes until you (just now) pointed them out. Anyway, it is back to ndashes with spaces (I kept the preceding nbsp). --Noleander (talk) 00:54, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the article follows that convention. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for catching that ... I'll fix it. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. As you recommended, I went with uppercase after the colons ... that had the bonus of eliminating the "[b]rackets" at the start of quotes. --Noleander (talk) 01:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could you be more specific, please? I spell out numbers when they are twelve or smaller; and use digits for 13 or larger. For decades I avoid apostrophes, as in 1890s. There must be some rule I am overlooking? --Noleander (talk) 01:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You just caught me - I saw twenty (I think) written out. I'll have a look to see where it is. In the "Racial violence" section, "twenty" is written out. In the "After the war" section, sixty is written out. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. There were two additional instances that needed to be fixed (apparently my subconscious uses the rule that multiples of ten are also written out :-) --Noleander (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

I primarily relied on three sources: Lewis, Horne, and Young. The Lewis biography is - far and away - the most authoritative source for Du Bois. It is a huge book, and it won two Pulitzer prizes. It was revised and updated in 2009, and no other source come close to it in detail, accuracy, or balance. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another significant fact is that the sources tend to agree on almost everything about Du Bois. The reason is, I believe, because Du Bois's life and opinions are heavily documented by Du Bois (especially his three autobiographies) and by contemporary sources. So there is very little room for interpretation. There are three issues on which the sources did differ, namely (1) whether or not he engaged in affairs (one biographer says yes, another says no); (2) whether or not he was spiritual (most agree he was not, yet one pointedly remarks on the spirituality which infused Du Bois's writings); and (3) whether he genuinely believed in communist/socialist ideals, or just employed them as a means to an end (to end racism). I'll double check the the article and make sure that both opinions are represented for those three issues. --Noleander (talk) 16:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, biographical sources often are repetitive or even deriviative, but if points of difference exist, they should get a mention. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. (1) the two viewpoints on extramarital affairs are covered in the Personal Life section; (2) I beefed up the Religion section to include mention of Blum's thesis that Du Bois employed religion in his writings, leading many of his contemporaries to view Du Bois as a prophet; and (3) I added a more explicit statement of his late-life embrace of communism (in the Communism section) ... so that section (plus the prior Socialism and Cold War sections) now cover all viewpoints. --Noleander (talk) 22:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article follows the convention where details about important reference books are listed once in the Reference section, and cited using the WP:CITESHORT approach; but minor books that are cited only once are not listed in the References section. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW: here is an example Featured Article from last week's main page that uses a similar convention: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. --Noleander (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More coming ... I'm thinking about this and will re-read again tomorrow Truthkeeper (talk) 22:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your comments. I'm busy in real life, but I should be able to address the punctuation/capitalization issues within a day or so (I believe the article already conforms to the WP MOS) but I'll double check. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, no rush. I'd like to read through a few more times and make more substantive comments anyway. I think the issue with the sourcing is that, although a biography might be superlative, often other biographies might give a different perspective thereby making a page as comprehensive as possible from all points-of-view. That's why I asked and why I need to re-read. I don't know much about him, but it's a good read. I see a few areas that are slightly choppy that I'm thinking about, but am certainly leaning support at this point if I'm certain it fulfills criteria 1 (b.). Truthkeeper (talk) 23:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Biographical details - a few questions about biographical details that I'm not quite clear about

Done. She became quite ill, but they were supported by her large family in the town. I'll update it to give that detail. --Noleander (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here is what I added: "William's mother worked to support her family (receiving some assistance from her brother and neighbors), until she experienced a stroke in the early 1880s and died in 1885". Let me know if that can be improved. --Noleander (talk) 17:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Yes, he got a BA in 3 years (he was an outstanding student) then got a 2nd BA at Harvard (Harvard did not accept most course credit from Fisk). I'll add that detail. --Noleander (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. He spent an entire year in Phila; then took a job at Atlanta Univ in 1897 (next section). I'll clarify the wording there. --Noleander (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (already in text: no edit made). He moved to New York in 1910. That is described in the section "The Crisis" where it says: "NAACP leaders offered Du Bois the position of Director of Publicity and Research. He accepted the job in the summer of 1910, and moved to New York after resigning from Atlanta University." --Noleander (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I'll insert mention of the marriage event at the correct chronological point in the article. He did not get along well with his first wife, and she played virtually no role in his career/writings/activism, and they often lived apart. I was not comfortable mentioning those details, since they didn't seem very encyclopedic. Do you think it would be appropriate to include it? --Noleander (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd add the biographical information. I caught it in the first read, wondered about the first wife when the second was mentioned, and then it niggled at me later, so I think it's appropriate. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll get to that later this evening. --Noleander (talk) 22:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I've added the marriage event into the appropriate chronological section. I included a footnote there mentioning that "she did not play a significant role in his career". Let me know if you think more detail should about (or about the fact that they were often estranged) in the body of the article. --Noleander (talk) 17:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to do this so piecemeal - one more set of comments coming. Truthkeeper (talk) 12:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I really appreciate your feedback ... the comments are great. --Noleander (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prose & content

Done. Reworded to "In the first decade of the new century, Du Bois emerged as a spokesperson for his race, ...". --Noleander (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Here is a link to the section. --Noleander (talk) 19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Here is a link to the section. --Noleander (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Change is here. --Noleander (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Here is a link to the section. --Noleander (talk) 19:53, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked too closely at sources, and I've also only briefly glanced at the images, but I think it would be a good idea to ask someone like JMilburn or Ruhrfisch give image review. I'll check in again at some point during the weekend. I'll need one more read through but expect to support when these issues are resolved. Truthkeeper (talk) 18:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll start working on those tasks above. I asked Ruhrfisch to look at the images. --Noleander (talk) 19:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've addressed by concerns. Nice job here. Good luck! Truthkeeper (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I really appreciate the time you spent improving the article. --Noleander (talk) 16:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not entirely sure what the process is to ensure that all the checks (sources/images/copyVio/spelling/etc) happen in an FAC nomination. I've done the checks for this article myself, of course, but obviously it would be best if a reviewer double checked. If any of those checks were overlooked, the Delegate would notice before closing the FAC, and would ask someone to do it. I know there is an offline tool to check for CopyVios, but I think it requires a fee to participate in the service ... not sure about that though. --Noleander (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It'll need a quick spot-check. I usually don't use a tool - will try to get to it later this evening. Otherwise tomorrow. But there's not a huge rush. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review, aside from the points raised by TK above. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. #8, #175, #176. --Noleander (talk) 05:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Four instances of Univ. -> University. --Noleander (talk) 05:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. FN #187. --Noleander (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 05:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 05:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 05:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (moved to Further Reading). --Noleander (talk) 05:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (removed all publ locations) --Noleander (talk) 05:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria (talk) 03:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: Thank you for the feedback. Your observational skills are incredible. --Noleander (talk) 05:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image Review

Done. Added details (the photo was by photographer Fred Gildersleeve) to the WikiCommons page for the photo. --Noleander (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See comment immediately below (picture was removed). --Noleander (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My point is File:Darkwater.jpg is a free image - it does not need to be removed (published before 1922) and does not need a Fair Use rationale as the copyright expired. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I removed three of the four book covers from the article, since they may not comply with WP:NFCC. I left the fourth cover: The Souls of Black Folk because the article has an entire section on the book, so it probably meets WP:NFCC requirements. --Noleander (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See comment immediately above. --Noleander (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I used that wording. --Noleander (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thanks for the info on stamp copyrights. I copied the pic from Commons to WP and added a fair use rationale. --Noleander (talk) 19:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps, thanks for everyone's work on the important article - it reads well, though I have not had time to read it carefully enough to review the prose. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All image issues are resolved, though I would be glad to see the Darkwater cover image added back in. All images in the article are either free or have a valid fair use justification. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, I see. I've restored the Darkwater cover image. Thanks for taking the time! --Noleander (talk) 19:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All done then - I updated the Darkwater image file to PD-US just now. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:55, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
Done. First name added. All sources spell the possessive as "Du Bois's", so the article follows that convention. --Noleander (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. That is a tough one. The sources are not sure on the matter: they are certain that he served in the military; and they speculate that he probably earned his freedom that way, but they are not sure. I reworded to "..., which may have been the reason he was freed from slavery." --Noleander (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done: Comma removed. --Noleander (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. That proposed phrasing implies that the community experienced little discrimination. I'll see if I can come up with a better phrasing. --Noleander (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure on that. "Great Barrington's primarily European American community treated William well, and he experienced little discrimination." shows the subject is William (oddly, that is my name as well, got to love irony). The community is a backdrop. It switched to "Great Barrington's primarily European American community treated William well, experiencing little discrimination." continues to have William as the subject discussed.--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I changed it as suggested. --Noleander (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
University education
Thanks for catching that: the parenthetical comment was missing a "not". It explains the fact that it took Du Bois 3 years at harvard to get a 2nd BA, when he already had one BA from Fisk. --Noleander (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Split into 2 sentences; 2nd is: " In 1890, Harvard awarded Du Bois his second bachelor's degree, ...". --Noleander (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wilberforce and University of Pennsylvania
Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done: re-worded to: "At Wilberforce, Du Bois was strongly influenced by Alexander Crummell, who believed that ideas and morals are necessary tools to effect social change" --Noleander (talk) 19:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 03:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Atlanta University
Booker T. Washington and the Atlanta Compromise
Done. Changed "learned" -> "educated". --Noleander (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Noleander (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Niagara Movement
The Souls of Black Folk
Racial violence
Done. I've replaced "stunned" -> "shocked". The word needs to convey that the community was outraged to a degree that caused them to shift allegiance from Washington to Du Bois. Let me know if you can think of a better phrasing. --Noleander (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That will do, just want to make sure there isn't OR, POV, etc in the article.--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The date is in the preceding sentence: "Two calamities in the autumn of 1906 ..". Let me know if you think it should be repeated. --Noleander (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well there in lies the issue. The one before does, however, the one after mentions September 1906. A more detailed point of 1906 would be good. If the discharges were not all at once then a simple addition of "discharged throughout that year(or)1906" would be good. If it was all at once, adding the month would be helpful to keep consistent.--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Changed "earth shaking" -> "watershed"; based on the source: "For African-Americans, Brownsville as the nadir. From pulpits across the land, imprecations were hurled at the president and at [Washington]... Summer and Fall of 1906 were to be a watershed for African-Americans ... bringing almost unrelieved turmoil. ..."
No idea what watershed is but its good enough for me.--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Academic work
Done. --Noleander (talk) 04:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the work is generally considered by scholars to be "landmark" or "ground-breaking" (their words); and is noted for its creativity and its use of statistics and economics. --Noleander (talk) 04:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alrght, I'll take it at your word.--WillC 04:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NAACP era
The Crisis
Historian and author
Combating racism
Done. --Noleander (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
World War I
After the war
Pan-Africanism and Marcus Garvey
Done. --Noleander (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Harlem Renaissance
Socialism
Return to Atlanta
Done. The source says that an African American was "on the ticket" for the Communist party in 1932; but the source does not provide a name, nor an office (I presume it was vice president). The article restates the source. I just did some more research, and it is James W. Ford, for VP. I've added that fact into the footnote following the "first African American on the ticket" sentence. Let me know if you think it should be in the article body. --Noleander (talk) 15:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Black Reconstruction in America
Done. The AHA is the American Historical Association. The acronym AHA is used three times in article, and it is defined (as " American Historical Association") on the first usage. The final usage of AHA was a bit far from the first, so I changed that 3rd usage to spell it out. --Noleander (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trip around the world
Done. --Noleander (talk) 15:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
World War II
Done. Thanks for catching that. --Noleander (talk) 15:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
United Nations
Cold War
Peace activism
Thanks for the feedback. I believe the article covers all the important aspects of Du Bois's life - but there are a couple of hundred books written about Du Bois, so of course many details and interpretations are necessarily omitted (the article is already at 9,000 words). For example, there are at least two books devoted to the topic of Du Bois & religion, and yet that topic only gets about 100 words in the article. But I think the article presents a good, encyclopedic overview, and any more detail is best handled with sub-articles. --Noleander (talk) 05:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - rather than clutter the page with my niggles, I just copyedited as I read. Excellent article! Note I'm not a fan of the "cite every sentence" school, but it's a valid choice so I won't oppose on that basis. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the appraisal, and thanks for taking the time to do some copyediting. --Noleander (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

That's it, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I implemented both of the above suggestions. Thanks for keeping me honest with the bullet points: I just ran out of steam. --Noleander (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


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