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

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 18:03, 16 October 2012 [1].


Hiram Wesley Evans[edit]

Hiram Wesley Evans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Mark Arsten (talk) & Crisco 1492 (talk)

Hiram W. Evans rose from a small-time dentist to the best-known racist in the United States, leading the Ku Klux Klan to national prominence. His gains were short lived, and he repudiated some of his bigotry before falling back into obscurity. Crisco and I have been working on this article (and its images) off and on for some time, I think we're ready for a shot at FAC now. Thanks to Wehwalt, Midnightblueowl, MathewTownsend, Rothorpe, and Parkwells for the help getting this ready. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:19, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SupportComment. Great article. Some nitpicks around the prose at a couple of points.

  • It is a step below the top, at least in the Scottish Rite. Mark, does the source say which Rite his Masonic group followed? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I trimmed it a bit to avoid the question. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take a look at this - I tried reordering it to deal with my points. If you don't like it, revert - but the edit may help show why I was confused. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe, but even so, there's something very odd about it being "a slight majority". It somehow implies that he cared: that if they in fact turned out to be 49% instead of 51% he would have changed his position, but I think we can safely conclude from his approach that he would have done nothing of the sort. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possible, although we should remember he had sweet words for everyone. I'll double check the reference if it goes into further detail. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um, how do I say this. No? "true Americans"? If that is a quote, fine, but otherwise the "whom he believed" formulation was preferable. I'm still a bit stuck on why the "slight" majority was important. If these were his own words, though, we could sidestep it somewhat by just quoting him. hamiltonstone (talk) 12:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't mind dropping it completely. (that whole clause) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generally a fascinating account.hamiltonstone (talk) 03:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • became a dentist. He operated a small, moderately successful dental practice in Texas — do we really need the "dental"?
  • But, they note that — This doesn't read write to me, if you are going to start with "but", I'd be inclined to lose the comma
  • sold their former headquarters in 1936 — Is this Washington or Atlanta?
  • sold the Klan's Atlanta headquarters, — does this refer to the above?
  • That was quick! I'm no expert on the content, but everything looks good, changed to support above. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments and support! Mark Arsten (talk) 16:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate's comment - This is what happens when candidates are thoroughly prepared. Graham Colm (talk) 18:07, 16 October 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.