Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Catherine, Princess of Wales/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Catherine, Princess of Wales[edit]

Catherine, Princess of Wales (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): MSincccc (talk), Keivan.f (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have collaborated on enhancing the article Catherine, Princess of Wales by updating its sources and refining its prose. With our combined efforts, we believe the article is now ready for submission to FAC. We seek to present a comprehensive and well-researched portrayal of Catherine's life and contributions, and we are committed to ensuring its accuracy and quality throughout the review process. Your feedback and support would be greatly appreciated as we endeavor to achieve recognition for this important piece of work. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
    • Done.
      • Further fixed a few alt text for a neater presentation and enhanced accuracy.
  • File:CatherineSignature.svg: signatures are not generally PD in the UK
    • Removed.
  • File:Cambridge_family_at_Trooping_the_Colour_2019_-_03.jpg is quite poor quality
    • No other pictures of the five of them together exists on the Commons. Personally I think it's better than nothing, though if the Community thinks it's of no encyclopedic value then we'll discard it.
  • File:Royals.18d884.1850611.jpg: source link is dead
    • It was uploaded by User:Janwikifoto. His identity has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team Software, to which I do not have access. But given their track record I really doubt that there is a copyright issue here.
      • It appears that that user has had a number of images deleted over copyright concerns. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:34, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Removed it as a precautionary measure to avoid problems down the line. Keivan.fTalk 04:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Arms_of_Catherine,_Princess_of_Wales.svg needs a tag for the original design. Ditto File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Kate_Middleton.svg, File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Catherine,_Duchess_of_Cambridge_(2011-2019).svg, File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Catherine,_Duchess_of_Cambridge.svg, File:Combined_Coat_of_Arms_of_William_and_Catherine,_the_Duke_and_Duchess_of_Cambridge.svg
    • These are the sources: 1, 2, 3. They are already cited in the article's body, so I suppose you want them added to the file descriptions?
      • Those sources indicate these designs are copyrighted? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • The arms were recreated by User:Sodacan for use on the Commons and many of them are in use at Coat of arms of the United Kingdom. There have been some discussions about some of the arms and monograms (1, 2, 3) and the result has been mostly 'keep' since they can be classified as original work. I think even the BBC copied them from us in two instances (1, 2). Keivan.fTalk 04:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • It does not appear that those discussions arrived at the conclusion that these are original work - two were discussions unrelated to copyright, and the third involved a design old enough to be PD. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            How should we proceed then @Nikkimaria? Regards. MSincccc (talk) 13:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            • You'd need to either find appropriate tags for these or remove them. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              @Nikkimaria Should I temporarily remove them until I can find suitable tags for the noted images? Regards. MSincccc (talk) 14:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              @Nikkimaria Removed the images mentioned from the article in the absence of an appropriate tag. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 15:05, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              • Yeah, remove them for now. But this is beyond the scope of this discussion. I single handedly cannot determine the copyright status of several coats of arms which is why I'll most probably start a deletion discussion on the Commons to address the issue. Keivan.fTalk 15:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                • Coats of arms should be OK as long as they are drawn from the blazon and not direct copies, per Commons:Commons:Coats of arms. DrKay (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Should I re-insert the Coat of Arms that have been removed then without an appropriate image tag @DrKay and @Nikkimaria? Do let us know. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I started a discussion on the Commons before seeing your message. If Commons:Commons:Coats of arms does indeed apply then I can withdraw that deletion request. Otherwise, I'll let the community decide because we are here to discuss the content of this article not the copyright status of several coats of arms in detail and I feel this discussion is going off track. Keivan.fTalk 17:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                    @Nikkimaria and @DrKay Do you have any further suggestions for us regarding the images? Looking forward to your responses. Regards MSincccc (talk) 06:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                  • @Nikkimaria: Re "needs a tag for the original design"—there is no original design for any of these. Coats of arms are rendered based on their blazon—a written description in standardized language. Each rendition is an original work in its own right. These files are, indeed, missing the {{Coa blazon}} tag, which clarifies this issue, but in terms of copyright and licensing they are all already appropriately tagged. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Based on the feedback received here and at the deletion discussion, I have restored the coats of arms. There is nothing wrong with their copyright status apparently. Keivan.fTalk 18:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Potternewton_Hall_Estate;_home_of_Olive_Middleton_(nee_Lupton)_and_her_cousin_Baroness_von_Schunck_(nee_Kate_Lupton).jpg: when and where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The uploader is still active on the Commons so I left a message to enquire about the file's origin. I'm waiting for their response. Keivan.fTalk 04:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Removed the image. I did not receive feedback from the uploader despite waiting for almost a week. Keivan.fTalk 18:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikkimaria Do you have any additional suggestions regarding the images used, their captions, and licensing? If so, please share your thoughts. Thank you for your feedback. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Are you satisfied with the images used, their captions and it's licensing? If yes, please do let us know of your verdict. Also, any further suggestions to improve the images would be greatly appreciated. Regards and yours faithfully, MSincccc (talk) 13:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I remain of the opinion that File:Cambridge_family_at_Trooping_the_Colour_2019_-_03.jpg is a poor-quality image, and there's another of the five in the article already. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the File:Cambridge_family_at_Trooping_the_Colour_2019_-_03.jpg. @Nikkimaria Could you please tell me which other images are poor in quality and need to be fixed? Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 02:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have quality concerns regarding other images. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Thanks for clarifying. Do you have any further suggestions for the image review, or does it conclude here? If so, please let us know your thoughts and your verdict. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 04:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no further suggestions. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note[edit]

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a general support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

750h[edit]

  • Comments to come soon. 750h+ 05:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
lead
  • On 9 September 2022, she became Princess of Wales when her husband was created Prince of Wales by his father, King Charles III. I feel like "created" sounds weird. recommend replacing with "declared"
early life, education and career
  • Following her mother's retirement and the buyout of her majority shareholding, the new business management at that stage encountered difficulties after axing the quarterly product catalogue. remove "at that stage" since we already know it was after her mother's retirement
  • and benefited financially from trust funds which they had established over a century ago. remove "had"
  • I feel like She obtained three A-Levels in 2000, with an 'A' in mathematics, an 'A' in art, and a 'B' in English. isn't particularly necessary, it's a pretty random year and isn't usually included in these types of articles.
personal life
  • After her graduation, Middleton and her family were faced with intensive tabloid press scrutiny. ==> "After her graduation, Middleton and her family faced intensive tabloid press scrutiny."
  • at a remote alpine cabin on Mount Kenya,[71] during a 10-day trip remove the comma
  • an undisclosed medical condition that was not cancer, after she had been admitted to remove the comma.
  • undisclosed medical condition that was not cancer, after she had been admitted to The London Clinic the previous day. The London Clinic should not have a capital "the". It's somewhat like "the Beatles".
  • for social and emotional development of youngsters ==> "for the social and emotional development of youngsters". Also change the word "youngsters", it's not very formal. Maybe change it to "young people"?
charity work
  • In May 2021, Catherine received her first dose of COVID-19 vaccine by => "In May 2021, Catherine received her first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine by"
  • Catherine has been hosting a Christmas carol concert at Westminster Abbey called Together At Christmas annually since December 2021.The 2021 concert honoured those who made significant contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic. why is there no space between the two sentences
  • In March 2022 and amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Catherine and William made a donation to help the refugees. ==> "In March 2022 amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Catherine and William made a donation to help the refugees."
  • The same month, she and William voiced the Mental Health Minute message again, which was broadcast on ==> "The same month, she and William voiced the Mental Health Minute message again, which broadcast on"
privacy and the media
  • The death of Diana, Princess of Wales, while being chased by paparazzi in August 1997[299] has since influenced her elder son, William's, attitude towards the media. ==> "The death of Diana, Princess of Wales, while being chased by paparazzi in August 1997[299] has since influenced her elder son William's attitude towards the media."
titles, styles, etc
  • Upon her marriage in April 2011, Catherine automatically became a princess of the United Kingdom, gained the style Royal Highness and the titles Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, and Baroness Carrickfergus. remove "automatically"
  • She was normally known as "Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge" except in Scotland, where she was instead called "Her Royal Highness The Countess of Strathearn". change "normally" to "formally"
verdict

That's all i have, nice work. But before supporting I might wait for a more experienced editor to join the conversation. you'll probably benefit from pinging some like SchroCat, HAL333, ChrisTheDude, or the people on the list of WP:FAM. Best, 750h+ 11:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+, I have addressed all your comments and made the necessary changes. Your support for Catherine's nomination will be greatly appreciated. Please put forward you suggestions, if you have any more. Looking forward to a positive response. Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean support. Waiting for another editor before i can fully support though. (consider pinging an experienced editor). 750h+ 13:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging experienced users on 750h+'s suggestion: @HAL333:, @ChrisTheDude:,@Gerda Arendt:, @Mike Christie:, @Harry Mitchell:, @Nick-D:, @Generalissima:, @Gog the Mild: and @Tim O'Doherty:. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MSinccc, that's not you ping users, you do {{ping|Example user}}. Also please do not ping that many people, three or around there is ok. 750h+ 13:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@750h+: I have pinged the users exactly the way you suggested. talk) 13:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW I've reverted one of these suggestions, namely "first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine", as there are several different vaccines. Also, I'm not particularly convinced about the "received [...] by NHS staff". How about "Catherine's first dose of COVID-19 vaccine was administered by NHS staff at [...]"? Rosbif73 (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The present sentence is fine as it stands. Thanks for your suggestion by the way @Rosbif73. Please feel free to leave any further suggestions you have. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 14:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another comment: @MSincccc, you have recently harmonised the capitalisation of the titles of cited sources. I can't find anything in the content guidelines or style guide about this, but it feels wrong to be changing the capitalisation actually used by the source itself. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosbif73 Its as per MOS:TITLECONFORM. Tim O'Doherty, who reviewed the article and it's related ones for GA, suggested that the capitalisation be made consistent as per MOS:TITLECONFORM. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I wasn't aware of TITLECONFORM, thanks for the link. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sodium[edit]

I intend to get to doing a review soonish. Sohom (talk) 22:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early_life,_education_and_career[edit]
  • Do we need upper-middle class in the first sentence, is this something the sources emphasize?
    • The fact that she is a "commoner" set to become the queen is discussed in the sources: 1, 2, etc. But it's also pointed out that her family were not poor 3. So I'd say those three words sum the whole thing up perfectly but if everyone insists on their removal then I'll definitely oblige.
  • This first paragraph is a mess in terms of a timeline. It starts with the subject being born before then talking about the mother's occupation a few years later and then catapulting into her retirement and then post retirement health of the company which she helped found. All the while the reader is left wondering what this has to do with Catherine herself.
  • The second paragraph feels even more out of place, and feels a bit unrelated. I would rewrite and absorb this paragraph into the first paragraph.
    • I trimmed and merged the two paragraphs. I have kept the info on her paternal and maternal family background to some extent. I'll wait until you reach the "Ancestry" section before moving around information on her family. That way I can get a finalized frame based on which I can trim/remove/alter the info.
  • she was enrolled aged four at St Andrew's School,... -- she was enrolled into St Andrew's School, ... at the age of four?
    • Yes. Per the BBC: "Catherine joined the school at four years old when her family returned to West Berkshire in 1986 after spending two-and-a-half years in Jordan. She was predominantly a day girl but boarded for part of the week in her later years."
  • she achieved a gold Duke of Edinburgh Award -- probably needs to be rephrased, "achieve" doesn't sound right here.
    • Rephrased and moved to the appropriate place.
  • before focusing solely on art history. -- solely is unnecessary
    • Removed.
  • The second last paragraph of the section reads like a laundry list of things that Catherine did before she married royalty, maybe instead of doing this, we could give a more general overview and contextualize it by merging in "Pre-marriage relationship with Prince William" (which appears to have happened in about the same timeframe)
    • Renamed the section to "Early life and education". Trimmed the paragraph, then divided the info between "Pre-marriage relationship with Prince William" and "Charity work" with information concerning her career and place of living put in the former, and the information on her pre-marital charity work in the latter.
  • The last paragraph seems almost unrelated it should be absorbed elsewhere.
    • Moved to footnote [a].
Pre-marriage relationship with Prince William[edit]
  • After her graduation, Middleton and her family faced intensive tabloid press scrutiny. that single statement is provided without context, why did she recieve intense tabloid coverage?
    • Clarified. According to the sources it stemmed from the fact that she was dating William, which the article now mentions.
  • She and her family attended the Concert for Diana in July 2007,where she and William sat two rows apart. this feels like a unnecessary amount of detail?
    • Removed.
  • with the day declared a bank holiday in the United Kingdom. Make this a seperate sentence instead of akwardly chaining two things together.
    • Done.
  • Catherine keeps bees on the grounds. What? Why? Huh? (This sentence doesn't fit in and disrupts the flow of the paragraph and should be moved somewhere else)
    • Removed. It referred to the grounds of Anmer Hall which is discussed in the previous sentence, but I agree. It's trivial and can be discarded.
  • for an undisclosed medical condition that was not cancer
    • Done.
That's it for right now, I intend to go through the rest over the weekend. My intial impressions with this review are unfortunately that the article will need a lot of restructuring and rewriting to become cohesive enough for a FA. I can see that a lot of effort went into tracking all the sources and compiling all of this information, and I'm really impressed by the level of detial, however, it currently feels a bit all over the place and without a cohesive narrative it's a bit of a mixed bag of information. Sohom (talk) 23:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta Thank you for your comments. Let us know if you have any further suggestions for the article. It would be greatly appreciated. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 03:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tried my best to address all of your concerns. I'm glad you found the article appropriately detailed. We did our best to ensure we are not missing anything of value. Will carry on once you have posted all your comments. Cheers. Keivan.fTalk 04:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More from me Sohom (talk) 07:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta I have addressed most of your comments. Thanks for your suggestions. They are greatly appreciated. Please do let us know if you have any further inputs to share regarding Catherine's article. I hope my responses to the suggestions are clear. Regards and yours faithfully, MSincccc (talk) 14:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • when she and William met Barack and Michelle Obama at Buckingham Palace. there should be something more to add here? Did she handle it well?
    • Thank you for your feedback. We appreciate your suggestion to add more details. However, we believe the current information sufficiently highlights the significance of Catherine's first official engagement after her wedding. By keeping the details concise, we aim to maintain the article's focus and readability. We hope this approach aligns with the overall objective of providing a clear and informative summary. Thank you again for your valuable input.
    • Added a short sentence which clarifies that the meeting was "warm" as a per the sources.
  • The first paragraph is again a laundry list of "she did this". Try to put atleast a line or two to contextualize the events (for example was there any particularly notable coverage of their tour of Canada or the US ?)
    • The detailed information regarding their visits has been covered in this article. Furthermore, the article 2011 royal tour of Canada covers their first major tour after their marriage in depth. Here, we are only summarising the overseas visits she undertook in an official capacity. Hence, all the engagements she carried out have been left out, following the GA reviewer's recommendations. Otherwise, the article would be unnecessarily long.
  • Similar issues with the 4th paragraph
    • Similar response as above. This article covers all the information regarding the official overseas visits in detail. We are only summarising here so as to not have an unnecessarily long biography.
  • visiting County Meath, Kildare, and Galway. that's a WP:SEAOFBLUE. Also I wonder if the Ireland trip is particularly important to include here. For the whole section, I would err on the side of including only the most important trips and then contextualizing and building a narrative/describing notable events instead of trying to pack as many events as possible.
    • Given that The Troubles lasted for three decades and William's great-great-uncle was assassinated by the IRA in 1979, I would say any trip to Ireland by the royal family is important. Even to this day their visits to Ireland are announced at the very last minute.
    • Solved the WP:SEAOFBLUE issue by replacing the names with "three of the country's counties".
  • The following day, William was created Prince of Wales by his father -- created doesn't make sense in this context
    • That's the standard usage in this context and can be found in countless reliable sources. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • She holds a number of charitable patronages:..... Same issues as above. That is a laundry list and a SEAOFBLUE.
    • Some of them were already discussed in the prose with context, so I linked them there instead. The other eight that were not mentioned specifically in the prose, I turned into a footnote (as has been done for articles such as Diana, Princess of Wales and Queen Camilla).
  • handpicked the Art Room this is confusing, I assume she handpicked the art in the Art room and not specifically the art room
    • Using "the art in The Art Room" could be misleading as it suggests she selected specific pieces of art within The Art Room rather than the organisation itself. Referring to "The Art Room" directly clarifies that she chose the entire charity or program, which provided art therapy to disadvantaged children.
  • handpicked the Art Room The source capitalizes the in "the Art Room"
    • Done. Thanks for the suggestion.
  • She discreetly volunteered with the Royal Voluntary Service during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic gets mentioned in the previous sentence, maybe say during the same time period.
    • Done. Thanks for your suggestion.
  • first dose of COVID-19 vaccine Do we know which vaccine she took?
    • From the cited source where it is clearly mentioned as such.
    • No, unfortunately we don't know the type, neither for her nor for other family members.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Catherine,_Princess_of_Wales/archive1&oldid=1226748776"