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 10:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

---

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate[edit]

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Freedom for the Thought That We Hate/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): — Cirt (talk) 04:31, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate is a WP:GA quality article on a book about freedom of speech rights derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The book was authored by Anthony Lewis, a two-time recipient of the Pulitzer Prize who passed away recently. After being promoted to GA status, the article received a copyedit through the Guild of Copy Editors.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration, — Cirt (talk) 04:31, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Public Policy ‎, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Books ‎, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human rights, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law , Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States ‎, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Journalism, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, User talk:Baffle gab1978 ‎, User talk:Bearian, User talk:Curly Turkey, User talk:Cirt. — Cirt (talk) 04:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

---

(addressed comments by Nikkimaria moved to talk page, per permission of Nikkimaria.)

I asked Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) for permission to move her (addressed) comments to the talk page, which was okay, per above link. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 03:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check by Crisco 1492

• No comment on the prose, but here is an image check for you:

File:Jeffrey Rosen.jpg - needs cats. Quality of the image is fairly poor, but this basically looks like the results of poor lighting.

Otherwise images look fine.

You may want to merge Publication history with "reception" for a "release and reception" section. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to image check

1. File:Jeffrey Rosen.jpg - Image categorization done. The image is at quite small sizing in the article space so the quality is alright here.
2. Thank you for looking over the other images.
3. Done. I've gone ahead and incorporated this suggestion, and merged the Publication history sect and the Reception sect into a sect, Release and reception.

Thank you for the image check, — Cirt (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, comments stricken. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 10:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Update on image check, per comments by Neelix (talk · contribs), below, I've removed File:Jeffrey Rosen.jpg, in favor of retaining the other image in that section of former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. Thanks again for the image check, — Cirt (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Neelix

(Addressed issues moved to talk page) Neelix (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Looks good. I have copyedited the article for the remaining grammatical errors. - Neelix (talk) 15:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• (the addressed comments may be worth moving to the talk page, for readability) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much, Neelix (talk · contribs), for the Support! As to minor formatting issues on this FAC, I agree with Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) it makes sense to move addressed comments to the talk page, or at the very least, strikeout the text of the addressed points. — Cirt (talk) 17:31, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Tony1

Suggestions:

• "the book begins by" -> "the book starts by" to avoid the b b b
• "portion" is marked; consider the unmarked "part"?
• MOS says you don't have to square-bracket the lower case when embedding a quotation within a WP sentence: "if there is ...", rather than the bumpy "[i]f there is ...". Unless there's some particular point in indicating that it's the start of a sentence rather than the start of a clause within a sentence ... I can't see it.
• Less ambiguous if "to suppress criticism and freedom of speech by citizens" were switched to "to suppress freedom of speech and criticism by citizens", but there may be a reason for not doing that.
• "Richard H. Fallon in Harvard Magazine", but "Jeffrey Rosen writing for The New York Times".
• Any way of avoiding the rep here? "Jeremy Waldron reviewed the work for The New York Review of Books" ... I can't think of one at the moment.
• "to which he devoted a chapter"—ref to his book or "this criticism? Also, was it "criticism in his book" or elsewhere?
• This is a very long lead into a quotation: "The title of the book derives from an admonition by Justice Holmes in his dissenting opinion in the 1929 case of United States v. Schwimmer that the First Amendment is particularly necessary amidst eras in U.S. history in which there is a risk of suppression of speech and dissent due to increased fear and upheaval:" Perhaps period after "Schwimmer" and "In this opinion, he ..."? "Amidst" is rather old-fashioned.

Nice to see one of our main experts in the US Supreme Court preparing a nom. Tony (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments by Tony1

1. Changed "begins by" to "starts by"
2. Copyedited this sentence a bit.
3. Removed the square-bracket the lower case when embedding a quotation within a WP sentence, per MOS.
4. "to suppress criticism and freedom of speech by citizens" now switched to "to suppress freedom of speech and criticism by citizens".
5. Changed to "Jeffrey Rosen in The New York Times".
6. Changed from "reviewed" to "commented", to avoid rep.
7. Added a comma to this sentence to make this clearer.
8. Broke this sentence up in two, per suggestion.
9. Removed word, "amidst", per recommendation, above.

Thanks very much to Tony1 (talk · contribs) for these helpful comments. — Cirt (talk) 15:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Prose comments from Crisco 1492

Last two paragraphs of the lede might be worth merging.

Any information on the actual writing of the book? I note that Neelix suggested the writer section be pulled, but if the writer had discussed how he wrote the book in the media, or had previously published work on freedom of speech, this would be relevant information.

walks the reader - non formal

the government led by President John Adams - Perhaps the federal government, under President John Adams, ...

President/president - when used as a general noun and not an honourific this should be a miniscule p

Last section tomorrow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs), I'll get right on addressing these. — Cirt (talk) 23:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, note that MOS:ELLIPSIS recommends against having non-breaking spaces on both sides of an ellipses. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. This should now be addressed, as well. — Cirt (talk) 23:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to prose comments by Crisco 1492

1. Done. Merged last two paragraphs of the lede.
2. Per above comments by Neelix (talk · contribs), I already removed the entire "Author" subsection. That is now gone. To then add it back would therefore unfortunately conflict with that prior recommendation by Neelix (talk · contribs). However, there is some information on the motivations of the author in the Themes section. There really wasn't a whole lot of commentary on this in secondary sources, other than what the author already said in the book itself. Therefore, that info is already contained in the Contents section.
3. Done. Removed phrase, "walks the reader".
4. Done. Implemented suggestion above by Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs). Changed to "the federal government, under President John Adams, ..."
5. Done. "President/president - when used as a general noun and not an honourific this should be a miniscule p" - implemented this change directly in the article.
6. Thanks very much for all of these helpful and specific suggestions. I have directly implemented all of them where possible. Thanks again, — Cirt (talk) 23:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support from Crisco 1492 on prose and images. Looks good! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:47, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! — Cirt (talk) 05:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Comments from Noleander

(addressed comments by Noleander moved to talk page, per permission of Noleander.)

Changing to Support, based on recent improvements. Have not spot-checked sources. --Noleander (talk) 00:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much to Noleander (talk · contribs), for the Support! Much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 01:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support—yeah, had another look through. Tony (talk) 04:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! — Cirt (talk) 05:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Graham Colm (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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