Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Arkansas Post (1863)/archive1
- 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 archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 17 April 2025 [1].
- Nominator(s): Hog Farm talk 20:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
The origination of the Arkansas Post operations is in some political shenanigans involving President Lincoln, John A. McClernand, and Henry Halleck. McClernand, a political general, managed to get what he thought was an independent field command, but Halleck and Ulysses Grant managed to divert his troops to William T. Sherman, in an operation that led to defeat at the Battle of Chickasaw Bayou. McClernand finally takes the field, and both him and Sherman independently come up with a plan to reduce a Confederate stronghold near Arkansas Post, Arkansas, with McClernand in charge. Along with David Dixon Porter's navy, the Union forces move up the Arkansas River. Awaiting McClernand's 30,000 men at Arkansas Post are 5,000 Confederates commanded by Thomas J. Churchill; one recent author of a biographical chapter about Churchill titled it "Not fortunate in war". Hog Farm talk 20:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
History6042's drive by comment
[edit]- All images need alt text. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
- @History6042: - I have made an attempt at alt text for all images; feel free to improve it. I struggle with alt text for complex maps. Hog Farm talk 02:40, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Image review
[edit]- Don't use fixed px size
- dealt with Hog Farm talk 03:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- File:Bombardment_and_capture_of_Fort_Hindman,_Arkansas_Post,_Ark._Jany._11th_1863_LCCN90711974_(cropped).jpg: when and where was this first published and what is the author's date of death?
- @Nikkimaria: - There's no specific date of creation or authorship information that I can find, but this is a part of a series of commercial prints that was produced by a company that specialized in the production and sale of commercial prints, which went out of business in 1907, so pre-1930 publication is guaranteed. I just don't know how to document this best. Hog Farm talk 03:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- If you can source that, I'd suggest just adding that explanation to the image description page for pre-1930 publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- I've added something to the image description page, hopefully nobody removes it for being out of place. Hog Farm talk 04:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- If you can source that, I'd suggest just adding that explanation to the image description page for pre-1930 publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - There's no specific date of creation or authorship information that I can find, but this is a part of a series of commercial prints that was produced by a company that specialized in the production and sale of commercial prints, which went out of business in 1907, so pre-1930 publication is guaranteed. I just don't know how to document this best. Hog Farm talk 03:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- File:(Map_and_inset_ground)_Plan_of_the_Fortification_(Fort_Hindman)_at_Post,_Arkansas,_Surrendered_to_the_U.S._Forces..._-_NARA_-_305724.jpg: source link is dead
- this is a slightly different scan - is that close enough? I'll add the link to the file description page if so Hog Farm talk 03:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- File:Arkansas_Post_Battlefield_Arkansas.jpg: see MOS:COLOUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
- Not easily fixable, removed. Hog Farm talk 03:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Gog the Mild
[edit]Recusing to review.
- "Union General-in-chief Henry Halleck". I think that should be 'Chief'.
- Changed at both instances Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "Both Sherman and McClernand had independently come to the conclusion that Arkansas Post should be attacked." Why? Militarily, what did Arkansas Post do?
- There were mixed motives here, probably self-serving to some extent. I've tried to distill this down to a short statement for the lead
- No rank for Porter?
- "Union Navy leadership decided that". Maybe a definite article at the start of that?
- "In September, Major General John A. McClernand had discussed with President Abraham Lincoln about a campaign down the Mississippi River". Delete "about".
- Removed Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "an arrangement was reached where McClernand was permitted". Suggest "where" → 'whereby'.
- "Vicksburg, Mississippi" doesn't need linking twice in one section, nor "Mississippi" at second mention.
- Corrected Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "as well as the condition of the roads that further movement by his column would be using." Is it me, or does this not quite work somehow?
- I have simplified this Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "Sherman had command of over 30,000 men ... Sherman's operation, which contained over 30,000 men". Do we need this information twice in one section?
- Have deleted the latter bit Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- In describing the fort, you jump from ditch to parapet, without describing the wall. Is that deliberate?
- After further review of the source, the author was using the term "parapet" to refer to the entire 18-foot sloped wall. I have rephrased this. Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "Sherman and McClernand had separately come to the conclusion that the Confederate position at Arkansas Post should be reduced. Separately, McClernand had also decided on a movement on Arkansas Post." The second sentence seems to duplicate the second. And maybe not use "separately" twice?
- I have removed the second part outright as a duplicate. Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- It may be worth briefly explaining somewhere what a division and a corps is.
- I have added a footnote discussing this. Hog Farm talk 03:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
- "On the morning on January 10, Lindsey's troops landed ashore". Suggest deleting "ashore".
- Removed Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "while the Union cannons on land joined in as well." I am not sure that you need both "joined in" and "as well".
- Removed "as well" Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "Porter's warships were to open fire on the Confederates as the signal for the attack, which would be followed by a bombardment by Sherman's artillery. Once Sherman's guns ceased firing, the assault was to begin ...The Union land artillery had orders to fire for thirty minutes after the naval bombardment opened, which was to be followed by an infantry attack three minutes after the thirty-minute firing interval." We may be into overkill territory here.
- I've made some consolidations of this material - are things better now? Hog Farm talk 02:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- Much.
- My settings show images larger than default, but even so the Vicksburg map, bombardment, battle map and flag images seem unduly small.
- I've enlarged the latter three. On my screen the Vicksburg maps fills its entire section, and I've been told before that it's best practice not to have images break into a second section. Although I don't know if that's policy or not. Hog Farm talk 02:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- On my devices they show much better now.
- "... the historian Ed Bearss ... The historian Richard L. Kiper ... The historian Michael B. Ballard ..." Maybe delete "The historian" from the last two? The chances of confusion seem minimal.
- Removed the introduction for the latter two Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- "3,000 stands of infantry weapons". How many weapons are there to a stand?
- Interesting. In the UK a stand of rifles is three.
- Looking further I'm seeing things that imply three as well. I don't think I've ever actually seen this defined in a ACW context. I'm going to ask around. Hog Farm talk 22:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Interesting. In the UK a stand of rifles is three.
- I've added a link to wikt:stand of arms Hog Farm talk 02:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- "Burbridge alone took 349 casualties". Maybe 'Burbridges brigade alone took 349 casualties'
- "as close as 25 miles (40 km) of the fort on January 12". Should that be 'to the fort'?
- Rephrased. Hog Farm talk 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
That's it from me. Nice work, as usual. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: - Thanks for your review! How do the changes made look? Hog Farm talk 03:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
@FAC coordinators: - This hasn't had any substantive activity in over two weeks and has only a single support after nearly a month, so it's clearly in danger of stalling out. I'm about to get busy enough with work over the next 1.5 - 2 weeks that I would have difficulty engaging with any potential reviews in a timely manner anyway, so this may as well be closed now and have the two-week clock start while I'd be busy anyway. Hog Farm talk 18:28, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- Will do Hog Farm. Be sure to ping me when you renominate. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.