Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crushing by elephant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Crushing by elephant

Self-nom. I would like to nominate Crushing by elephant for renewed FA status. It used to be a featured article and was shown on the main page on March 14, 2004, but then had its featured status withdrawn after much of the content was removed due to a lack of sourcing - see Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/crushing by elephant. (Amusingly, the article is Jimbo Wales' nomination for "Wikipedia's most random entry"! - [1])

Having long had a soft spot for the article, I've revisited it and considerably expanded it with extensive referencing using contemporary and modern sources. The revised article now explains the history of crushing by elephant from Roman times through to 19th century India and Indochina. It describes various methods used and provides eyewitness descriptions of crushings along with an explanation of the social context of this rather unpleasant method of execution. It even has two pictures, one of which I managed to obtain from an original copy of a 1681 book.

I believe that it meets both the Good Article and Featured Article criteria, but in view of its length I'm submitting it to FAC for consideration. You might say that "The number of words on crushing by elephants has tripled in the past six months". ;-) -- ChrisO 13:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support - well-written and interesting article, with excellent references. Congratulations to ChrisO for finding and scanning the 17th-century artwork "An Execution by an Eliphant". I do have a few comments to improve the article, and I'll comment on those separately. Carcharoth 14:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comments - as promised, a few comments:
  • The chronology is slightly confused, with the article being organised into 'Ancient times and Middle Ages' and 'Modern period'. But the first paragraph of the India section in the Modern Period covers the Ancient period! Overall the organisation between chronological presentation and geographical presentation could be improved. Maybe by summarising chronologically before going into detail for each region?

    I've addressed this by taking a different tack: arranging it geographically from west to east (starting with the western empires, as that's where we have the oldest records, followed by west Asia, south Asia and south-east Asia). -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • In general, more precise dating and location details for each example would be nice. Links to other articles require people to go there to find out the dates of the historical period linked. If you are organising by date, put the date details in this article (eg. say what period Perdiccas is from). Ditto for the geographical stuff (eg. say where Perdiccas was carrying out his executions - hint, it was not in Macedon!).

    No, it was Babylon! I've added these details now. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Different elephant species and wild vs domesticated. You should make clear that Hannibal's elephants were a dwarf variety from Africa and the Perdiccas ones were probably from India. Were Ptolemy IV's elephants African or Indian? Ditto for all the examples you give - which species of elephant? Also, you could try and say something about whether sub-Saharan African elephants were ever used this way (I'd speculate probably not, because it was the Asian elephants that were domesticated, and the sub-Saharan African elephants remain wild to this day, being (I think) larger and less easy to domesticate. ie. say something about wild vs domesticated elephants (or rather, say more than you say at the moment).

    I've added a paragraph on this subject. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • A point of chronology. You seem to have organised the "Ancient times and Middle Ages" in chronological order, but you have mentioned Perdiccas (died 320 BC) after Ptolemy IV Philopator (reigned from around 220 BC).

    I've changed the approach a bit. Perdiccas and Paulus both used elephants to discipline troops; Ptolemy IV allegedly used them to carry out civil executions (much closer to the uses described in the rest of the article). I've therefore grouped these accounts by category (military followed by civil). -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • A point of fact. You say that Perdiccas "became regent of Macedon on the death of Alexander the Great" - in fact, you should really say more than this. Read Perdiccas and Partition of Babylon for details. I think you need to say that Perdiccas was regent of the Macedonian empire, and not just the kingdom, and similarly make clear that this probably all took place in Babylon, and that the use of elephants was probably inspired by the campaigns in India. Though you will need to find sources for all this - I am speculating on some points here.

    I found an account by Quintus Curtius Rufus which does indeed say that it took place in Babylon - it's now quoted in the article. I've clarified the point about Perdiccas' status. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • General point of facts - you might want to click on all the links in the article and check that your article is consistent with other Wikipedia articles. When I was checking the regnal dates for Ptolemy IV Philopator, I discovered that his article says 221-224 BC (different to your dates). I seem to recall that this is a fairly common problem with the Egyptian Ptolemies, with two different regnal numbering systems being used and some confusion over the regnal dates. Anyway, it is worth clicking on every link and checking that there are no inconsistencies like this.

    Yeah, I've seen many different dates for the Ptolemies... anyway, it's corrected now. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Categories. The article is not in enough categories. It should be in at least one "historical" category. I would suggest Category:History by topic or one or more of the subcategories of that category.

    I've added several regional categories plus Category:Legal history - if we have hanging, drawing and quartering in there, there's definitely room for crushing by elephants! -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Finally, I'd like to reiterate my support expressed above. I really enjoyed reading this article. Carcharoth 14:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: "such fatalities tend to be the result of wild elephants attacking humans rather than tame elephants being used by humans to kill other humans." (emphasis mine) So does the use of "tend to be" mean that there have indeed been a few exceptions where, in recent years, humans have intentionally set elephants on other humans? If so, they should be mentioned. Andrew Levine 15:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

  Not my wording. I agree, it's ambiguous; I've clarified this point now and noted that it's still a significant cause of death among zoo keepers. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support At what point did the number of inline citations become the major measure of an article's quality?! We are trying to write an open encyclopedia for everyone, and not turn into a grad school thesis mill.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support well done. Sumoeagle179 23:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Mild Object for now. I'd like to see a slight expansion of the lead (a second paragraph would help) and several more in-line citations for the first paragraph in the 'Cultural aspects' section. For example, a claim like "The use of elephants as executioners was inextricably bound up with the use of the animals as symbols of royal power" needs to be referenced. Once these concerns are addressed I'll support.UberCryxic 00:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  The entire 1st paragraph including that line you quoted was sourced from a reference already given ([2]); I've clearified this. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

There may be some issues with style there, but I can ignore that. And the lead?UberCryxic 04:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Support, would be nice if the lead could be expanded a bit though, but otherwise very good. — Wackymacs 12:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  If you have any suggestions I'd appreciate them. Given that much of the article is a description of specific rulers' use of the method, and the various permutations thereof, it's not really obvious how that could be summarised much more than it already is. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Object - This is a pretty interesting article and in pretty good shape. I just have a few concerns that keep me from supporting:
  • Contains a disambiguation link.

    I don't understand this objection at all. Since when has "contains a disambiguation link" been a criterion for voting against a FA? It's certainly not in the criteria. In any case, it's a necessary disabiguation, since elephant crushing is a potentially confusingly similar term. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

    I'm not referring to the link to elephant crushing, I'm referring to a link to a disambiguation page within the article's body. Pagrashtak 19:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

    Presumably classical period. Carcharoth 14:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

  • The lead should probably be a little bigger.
  • 3 Maccabees describes a probably apocryphal attempt by Ptolemy IV Philopator... - "Apocryphal" is modifying "attempt" here — is it being used as a synonym for fake? If so, this is confusing, since 3 Maccabees is regarded as apocryphal in the theological sense.

    I've modified this line to note that it's the story that's apocryphal. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

    I'm still unsure if you're using apocryphal as a synonym for "fake" or in the theological sense. If the former, you should remove the link. Pagrashtak 19:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

  • The sentence Death by elephant is still not uncommon in parts of Africa and South Asia... needs a reference and also leads into my biggest concern:

    Reference added. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • This article seems to go beyond the scope of its title. I would assume that if one were to be killed by an elephant it would probably be by crushing, but I have to ask — is the sentence from my previous point referring to crushing specifically or death by elephant in general? (And how often is "not uncommon"?) Another example: It then seizes him with its lip, casts him aloft and slays him. from the account of Petachiah does not mention crushing at all. The account from Tennet: ...placing his foot on the prostrate victim, plucked off his limbs in succession by a sudden movement of his trunk. is specifically not crushing. I wonder if Execution by elephant (currently a redirect to this article) would be a more appropriate title.

    From the various accounts I found, it does seem that crushing was the most widely used method (which is what you would expect, given that it wouldn't require much training) and the other methods were less common. -- ChrisO 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

    I would suggest renaming this page "Death by elephant", since it seems to cover all forms of death by elephant, whether crushing, goring, or otherwise. Pagrashtak 19:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

    Since this page is linked from about a zillion places, I'd prefer to get some community input about a possible renaming, rather than doing it unilaterally. When this FA vote is done, I'll raise it on WP:RM. -- ChrisO 23:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

    Actually, its only linked to from about 120 pages. Carcharoth 23:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Pagrashtak 19:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I've removed my objection, although I would like to see a two-paragraph lead. Pagrashtak 19:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Chronology needs a little tweaking but otherwise great. I would support a move to "Execution by Elephant" or similar if that would decide this vote. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment quotes should not be in italics, as per the MoS.--Peta 02:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

  Thanks, I've fixed this. -- ChrisO 19:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support well rebuilt after the loss of a lot of information. Kingfisherswift 17:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
• Support. This is one of my favorite articles on Wikipedia and, truth be told, I thought it was a FA already. The only concerns I have are that, as others have mentioned, the article covers more than just crushing by elephant, and there are perhaps slightly more red links in the body of the article than I like to see in an FA. However, these do not stop me from supporting the candidature. --Roisterer 02:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

  Filling in the red links will take time, but I've managed to do two today (Sri Vikrama Rajasinha and Henry Charles Sirr). -- ChrisO 23:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

  OMG! Sri Vikrama Rajasinha is Not A Nice Story! I feel a bit sick after reading that quote about the gory execution. Are all these 19th century travel books like that? :-) PS. I found the dab link that someone mentioned, and I've identified it above so you can clear that bit up if you want. Carcharoth 23:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Well built. Naraht 16:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)