[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Edith Roosevelt/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 FrB.TG via FACBot (talk) 9 October 2024 [1].

Edith Roosevelt

[edit]
Nominator(s): Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Roosevelt was a lifelong companion to President Theodore Roosevelt, from childhood until Theodore's death. Shying from the spotlight as her husband became increasingly famous, she found herself thrown into the role of first lady over a matter of days when Theodore unexpectedly became president of the United States. As first lady, she ruled Washington's social life with an iron fist, holding meetings with the wives of Theodore's cabinetmembers to determine when and how they were to hold events—and who they weren't allowed to invite. Edith took charge of the White House's first major renovation, and she was the first of the first ladies to hire her own employee.

This is the fourth article of my U.S. first ladies project that I'm submitting as a featured article candidate. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Edith_Kermit_Carow_Roosevelt_by_Frances_Benjamin_Johnston.jpg: when and where was this first published? Ditto File:Edith_Roosevelt.jpg, File:Theodore_Roosevelt_and_family,_1903.jpg, File:Edith_and_Ethel_Roosevelt_cph.3b42358.jpg
  • File:Theodore_Roosevelt_and_family._"From_a_father_of_five_to_a_father_of_five"_-_Gilbert_Studios._LCCN2015650317.jpg: when and where was this first published and what is the author's date of death? Ditto File:Mrs._Theodore_Roosevelt_LCCN2009631530_(cropped).jpg, File:Mrs._Theodore_Roosevelt_LCCN2009631491_(cropped).jpg
  • File:Mrs._Roosevelt,_Quentin.jpg: where is that licensing coming from? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Edith_Kermit_Carow_Roosevelt_by_Frances_Benjamin_Johnston.jpg, File:Edith_Roosevelt.jpg, File:Mrs. Theodore Roosevelt LCCN2009631491 (cropped).jpg – These are all from the same source, which doesn't provide that info, and a Google search for each image didn't turn anything up.
    • File:Theodore_Roosevelt_and_family._"From_a_father_of_five_to_a_father_of_five"_-_Gilbert_Studios._LCCN2015650317.jpg – Same as the others, but it's from Gilbert Studios, which was apparently owned by commons:Category:C. M. Gilbert. I don't know whether that's enough to call him the author though.
    • File:Mrs._Theodore_Roosevelt_LCCN2009631530_(cropped).jpg – Figured out the author and added to the Commons page
    • File:Mrs._Roosevelt,_Quentin.jpg – Yeah, that wasn't ideal. I switched the description to the standard format used by the other images, and I swapped the CC tag with a standard PD tag. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TBUA, just a reminder that Nikkimaria's outstanding comments need addressing. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said previously, I am unable to verify publication. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nikki, TBUA, can you bring me up to speed on this? If publication can't be verified, have the image tags been altered, or the images removed? Or are we good to go with the image review? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:21, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We still have several images present with unverified tagging. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm here from the Discord after TBUA asked on the #commons channel about the images. I'm not sure why it would need something to demonstrate that it's public domain or when it was first published, especially as it came from the Library of Congress IMO, I would assume that the LoC would know what they're doing, but some of the licenses can be changed.
According to this guide by the LoC, "No known restrictions on publication" generally means that a) there was copyright but it wasn't renewed or expired; b) no copyright markings or indications; c) no records or indications of any copyright registration; d) Acquisition paperwork for collection doesn't have evidence of restriction; and e) They were published extensively without any claimed rights by someone. It notes that these do not exclusively mean that it's public domain, but there's no evidence of restrictions in the first place. reppoptalk 20:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
reppop, thank you for the straightforward explanation of what changes might be needed. Since there's been no comment regarding these suggestions, I've implemented them. Also just letting you know that I've moved your comment to the bottom of the discussion because it intersected with the outdent. Pinging the reviewer: Nikkimaria. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you've added the suggested tags to what was already present, rather than changing the tagging? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked you several weeks ago whether the tags would need to be removed/replaced, and you never responded. I am not active participant at Wikimedia Commons and I've basically had to feel my way around in the dark throughout this review. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think I was looking for more detail to answer your question about alternative tagging, but essentially if a tag can't be verified to be correct, it shouldn't be used. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've now removed all of the publication date tags where only the date of the photo is known. I've also removed the author death tag where the studio is known but the specific author hasn't been proven. This is in addition to the tags I added per reppop's explanation. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @Nikkimaria. Does the removal of the publication tags work for you? FrB.TG (talk) 14:56, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by from Kavyansh

  • link White House in the lead
  • "came to be her most enduring legacies." — I feel we are stating a widespread scholarly opinion as a fact. I would have written it as "are considered by scholars/historians/authors<whatever deeps appropriate> to be her most enduring legacies."
  • "Managing the family became a large responsibility, as she also considered her husband to be one of the children for his involvement in the children's trouble-making," — Interesting! But do we need this in an encyclopaedic article?

I might add a few more comments, but I won't be supporting or opposing the nomination, primarily because these are just drive-by comments. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback, always appreciated! I've made the first two changes. For my part, I've always liked having a few more personal details to give a better picture of the subject's family life and personal thoughts, but I have no objection to changing how it's presented or just removing it if others agree that it doesn't work as it currently stands. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MSinccc

[edit]

MSincccc, I've replied to everything to this point. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:33, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First lady of the United States
  • Rather than hiring a housekeeper, she took personal responsibility for the care of the mansion. I suppose it should be "hiring" instead of "hire".
  • Each Tuesday, Edith organized a meeting with wives of all the cabinet members to run concurrently with cabinet meetings.
  • For two months beginning in April 1903, Theodore ventured off on a trip to the west, and Edith cared for the children on her own, first on a cruise aboard the USS Mayflower and then in the White House. What do you mean by the "White House" here? Was it a vehicle for him to travel to the West?
  • Besides her own children, Edith also ensured to dedicate time to her stepdaughter Alice, who felt neglected by Theodore.
@Thebiguglyalien Till here for now. I will return with further suggestions later. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 03:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"ensured to dedicate time" doesn't sound right to me, but I've made the other changes. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thebiguglyalien Fine. I do not have any major suggestions for improvement at the time being. Keeping that in mind, I will not hold back my opinion for this article's FAC. Support. MSincccc (talk) 10:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

Outstanding work as usual; as usual, this is nothing but a list of minor nitpicks and I expect to support once these are dealt with or argued away.

  • "until after Theodore was engaged to Alice Hathaway Lee": suggest making this "until after Theodore was engaged to his first wife, Alice Hathaway Lee". I suspect I know more about Teddy than most Americans (I live near Sagamore Hill and have visited it several times) but I still had to click through to remind myself that he did marry Alice.
  • "and got elected governor of New York": suggest "and was elected" as a little more formal in tone.
  • "She then became second lady of the United States when Theodore was elected Vice President, and she became first lady when the assassination of President William McKinley propelled Theodore to the presidency later that year." A bit repetitive in structure, and I'm not keen on the "then". I also think it would help to have one or two dates in this paragraph. How about inverting the first half: "When Theodore was elected Vice President in March 1901 she became second lady of the United States for six months, and then became first lady when the assassination of President William McKinley propelled Theodore to the presidency in September of that year"? Mentioning a year once or twice earlier in that paragraph wouldn't hurt either.
  • "she featured various musical artists at the White House": perhaps "invited to" rather than "featured"?
  • "held a mutual animosity toward his wife Helen Herron Taft": I don't think there's a good verb that you can use in the form "she Xed animosity towards". If you want to keep "animosity", I would suggest "and there was mutual animosity between Edith and Taft's wife, Helen Herron Taft". If you'd rather avoid the passive, maybe "and she and his wife, Helen Herron Taft, strongly disliked each other".
  • "She remained politically active, supporting Warren G. Harding in 1920 and Herbert Hoover in 1932—the latter being an effort to distance herself from Hoover's opponent ...": this doesn't work syntactically -- "the latter" refers to Hoover himself, not her support for him. Maybe "She remained politically active, supporting Warren G. Harding in 1920 and Herbert Hoover in 1932. Her support for the latter was an effort to distance herself from Hoover's opponent ...".
  • "Edith's early schooling took place at the Roosevelt home": can we give the location?
    • It says in the previous paragraph that they were in Norwich, Connecticut. I don't want to be redundant, and this is how the source handles it.
  • "Managing the family became a large responsibility, as she also considered her husband to be one of the children for his involvement in the children's trouble-making". I don't think "as" works unless the source is clear that it would not have been a large responsibility without Theodore's attitude, which seems unlikely given the number of children and the expectation of the day that mothers were responsible for day-to-day parenting. Suggest "Managing the family became an increasing responsibility, and she counted her husband as one of the children because of his involvement in the children's trouble-making".
    • I went with "in part because", does that work?
  • "cared for their family friend Cecil Spring Rice during his visits": this makes it sound as if he was an invalid?
  • "Fischer's antique shop": this is mentioned as if it's well-known. Is it a candidate for a redlink?
    • The source makes it seem this way, but I also can't find any sources with a surface level search.
  • "Attending several receptions in 1890, Edith was received at the White House with her husband, now as a guest rather than a tourist": suggest "She attended several receptions in 1890, and was received at the White House with her husband, now as a guest rather than a tourist". I assume some of these receptions were not at the White House? If they all were at the White House then that could be made definite with "She attended several receptions at the White House in 1890 with her husband, and was now received as a guest rather than a tourist".
  • "on February 1, 1894, by President Grover Cleveland, where Edith was sat directly next to the president": suggest "on February 1, 1894; Edith was seated directly next to the president, Grover Cleveland". I don't think we need to say Cleveland personally issued the invitation (and he probably didn't, anyway).
    Is "sat" formal AmEng usage? In BrEng it would have to be "seated"; "sat" sounds very odd to me. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The promise proved to be short-lived." This doesn't sound right to me; promises don't last -- they are kept for a long time or a short time. Perhaps "The promise was not kept for long"?
  • Is the link for Friday Morning Club correct? That article is about a building in Los Angeles.
  • "Edith was uncomfortable with the proposition of Theodore running for Vice President of the United States": I think it would be better to start with the vice presidential opportunity as context rather than assume the reader knows what's coming -- e.g. "In 1900 Theodore was urged by Henry Cabot Lodge and others to accept the vice-presidential role on the Republican national ticket" (stealing from our article on Theodore). Then we can say Edith was uncomfortable with the idea.
  • Our article on Theodore says he actually did issue a public statement that he would not accept the nomination, but here you say he only drafted one -- is one of the articles wrong?
    • Schneider & Schneider (2010) and Morris (1980) both say they drafted it together and then skip straight to him accepting the nomination. Gould (2013) says "Yet, Theodore never went the final step of saying he would decline the vice presidency if it were offered to him."
  • I don't doubt your adherence to the sources, but Cleveland's reassurance to Edith seems odd as it doesn't seem to address any of the concerns listed -- it's as if Cleveland was reassuring her that Theodore could cope.
    • It's possible that I didn't convey it very well, but it tracks in my mind. She was worried for his safety and about how much he was doing, and Cleveland assured her that he could handle all of it.
      But the list of her concerns doesn't include "how much he was doing", which is what Cleveland's reassurance seems to be mostly aimed at. Can we add that to her list of concerns? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "For her sitting room, Edith used an oval library adjacent to the president's office". Was this the Yellow Oval Room?
    • It's possible, but I don't want to assume, especially since the White House has been redone a few times.
  • "Edith seemed to regret how her role as first lady": suggest "that" rather than "how".
  • "with new obligations that brought her displeasure: suggest simplifying, e.g. "that she disliked".
  • "commenting on how it ruined the grass": suggest "saying that it". I think "how" in these constructions is more useful when the intended meaning is "the manner in which" rather than just "that".
  • "Because of a lack of historical records": does this really add anything?
  • I don't understand the account of her interactions with Frances Metcalfe Wolcott. If the Wolcotts were divorced and stayed so, in what way did she "help ... fix her marriage"?
  • "the handkerchiefs were scrutinized and criticized": I don't know that more details are worth including, but I am curious as to what the criticisms were -- poor fashion choices?
    • The source doesn't give much. It quotes one person as saying they were "tacky" and mentions one women's group in Texas that liked Varina Davis's handkerchief better.
  • "Edith featured the famous German composer Engelbert Humperdinck when he visited the United States": what does "featured" mean here?
  • "She exerted her influence over journalists, such as occasions when she wore the same dress multiple times but convinced the reporters to describe it differently": suggest "She exerted her influence over journalists: for example, when she wore the same dress on multiple occasions, she convinced the reporters to describe it differently each time."
  • "Edith and Helen had developed a rivalry over the years, both distrusting each other and the other's husband. This rivalry contributed to a rivalry between Theodore and William in the following years." Repetition of "rivalry"; can we eliminate at least one?
  • Suggest linking Richard Derby Jr to Ethel Roosevelt Derby#Marriage and family, to satisfy the curiosity of readers who wonder via which child Richard was a grandchild.
  • "Then in 1927, Edith ferried across the Paraná River in Argentina until she reached the Iguazu Falls in Brazil". I don't think "then" is necessary; and this phrasing makes it sound as if she piloted the ferry. Could we say "took a ferry" or even just "crossed"? I had to look at the linked article on the falls to understand why the sentence is constructed this way -- is the intended meaning something like "she took a ferry across the Paraná River in order to reach the Iguazu Falls"? If so I would suggest that phrasing, with "on the border between Argentina and Brazil" at the end to simplify the first half of the sentence.
  • "By this time, Edith began having": either "had begun to have" or "was beginning to have", or cut "By this time".
  • "Knowing that her health would not let her travel as frequently": suggest "Knowing that her health would no longer let her travel frequently".
  • "as it had been thoroughly furnished": surely "refurnished"?
  • "and her allowance of racist songs to be performed at the White House to suggest strong anti-black views": suggest "and the fact that she allowed racist songs to be performed".
  • Steinmetz is in the list of references but does not appear to have been used.
  • Not a FAC requirement but you might add "|ref=none" to the further reading citation templates to avoid harv errors for those who have them enabled.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Christie I've made changes for each point except for the ones I've replied to above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:50, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most points struck; a couple of minor queries above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mike Christie, agree that "seated" makes more sense. And I went back to the source and looked to see what concern it raised immediately before Cleveland's comment, so that should be fixed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 08:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Edwininlondon

[edit]

A nice piece of work. Reads well and looks very comprehensive. I tried my best to nitpick and managed a few. Please ignore as you wish, especially since I am not a native speaker.

  • Edith Carow began a romance with Theodore Roosevelt --> the body text is more neutral about who took the initiative
    • I don't read this as her taking initiative, just that he was the person she was with when it happened.
  • she participated in New York social life --> just wondering if a 's would be better
  • but she preserved only one of these letters --> the but makes it sound there is an intriguing story here
    • I'm not sure what you mean.
      • Sorry for not being clear. Let me try again: Why is the word "but" here? This to me hints at something of a controversy among historians whether they were or were not in contact. If there is some kind of controversy, this should be explained. If none such is the case, I wonder what the value of adding "but she preserved only one of these letters" is.
  • because they could not count on a mayor's salary --> sorry I don't understand count: could it be that NYC's finances were shaky or something?
  • in Albany --> link?
  • incredibly thin --> not sure I would use incredibly, I think "very thin" sounds more like WP's tone
  • subsequently had lunch with the McKinleys --> I had to look up who had won the 1900 election. Would be nice to tell the reader at some stage, so that this lunch is understood to be with the top cheeses
  • he would experience as presidency --> president?
  • former president Cleveland --> we have a P in President McKinley, which is definitely good, but is it former president Cleveland or former President. I'm not sure, I suspect you are.
    • In this case I'm not sure if "former president" is a common noun descriptor and "Cleveland" is the object, or if "former" is a modifier and "President Cleveland" is the object. MOS:JOBTITLE has never been intuitive to me.
      • MOS:JOBTITLE does not seem to help. If I had to guess, I'd go for former president Cleveland
  • Edith was confident in Theodore's chances for his reelection --> when was this?
  • moved back in to --> moved back into
  • by Caroline Harrison --> by former first lady Caroline Harrison
    • Done, but the JOBTITLE issue might also be relevant here.
  • Republican Party --> link?
  • been granted the right to vote --> link perhaps to Women's suffrage in the United States
  • Franklin D. Roosevelt --> should be linked. I realise this may generate a sea of blue, so perhaps a little rejigging of words is possible?
  • "Everything she did was for the happiness of others". --> "Everything she did was for the happiness of others."
  • nineteenth century --> earlier we have 19th

That looks to be it. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edwininlondon I've replied to a few above, and I made the suggested changes for all of the others. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose. The only quibble I have left is the odd "but" in "but she preserved only one of these letters". However, that does not stop my support. Nice work. Edwininlondon (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

Carl Sferrazza Anthony isn't linked even though Betty Boyd Caroli is. Likewise, the two citations to scri.siena.edu are inconsistently formatted. With the exception of Morris, Sylvia it seems like we are using prominent authors and biographers as sources. I wonder if there are other sources (academic publications that aren't books etc) that could be used. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jo-Jo Eumerus Thanks for the feedback! I believe I've fixed these issues. To get a quick sense of what else might exist, I did a Google Scholar search for "Edith Roosevelt" (with quotes) and nothing about her came up except sources already in the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that leaves only Morris, Sylvia - is she a high-quality reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jo-Jo Eumerus, I believe so. The publisher of the book appears reputable, and she's also published with Random House as a biographer. I found her Wikipedia article while checking this, so I linked it in the reference as well. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this is OK then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jo-Jo Eumerus, just to make sure everything is addressed, I'm good to go on sourcing? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

[edit]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Edith_Roosevelt/archive1&oldid=1250267462"