Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chinua Achebe

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 04:25, 4 November 2007.

[edit] Chinua Achebe

Peer reviews

Mr. Achebe is probably the most important African writer of the 20th century. I have spent the past month taking this article from Start-class to what several folks have indicated is FA quality.

For biographical info I have relied heavily on one text, written by Ezenwa-Ohaeto – it is the only book-length biography available. The numerous other books called Chinua Achebe are devoted to analysis. – Scartol · Talk 00:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Support I poked around behind the scenes as this article developed. Reviewed it as well. It's in tip-top shape. We ought to try to get Achebe to read it. --JayHenry 01:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Remarkable coincidence – I was just thinking about how incredible it would be to hear from him about it. Thanks for the votes of confidence. – Scartol · Talk 01:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, he's still at Bard. Achebe... think he checks that e-mail? --JayHenry 01:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I would be wary of that. I belong to a children's literature listserv to which Philip Pullman subscribes. He is not shy when it comes to expressing his opinion of scholars' interpretations of his books. It has made me glad to some extent that my writers are dead. :) Awadewit | talk 01:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I do know someone at Bard, but I don't think they've had any contact with Achebe. Nishkid64 (talk) 15:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd much prefer to send an actual letter, once the FA star is added. Thanks everyone for the ideas. Insofar as the article here doesn't interpret his work much (I've just cited other sources that do), I doubt we'd hear the kind of comments Pullman sends to the listserv. – Scartol · Talk 16:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Ooh! And you should include the URL to Jimbo's fundraising video. Maybe that scene about ten seconds in where Jimbo does his T.J. Eckleburg impression will convince Achebe to donate to Wikipedia and maybe even create an account! --JayHenry 21:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support I peer reviewed this excellent article and I whole-heartedly support its promotion to featured article. It is well-written, well-researched, comprehensive, and adheres to all of the rules of the MOS of which I am aware. (Perhaps new ones have just been added at this very moment, however.) I am delighted that Scartol has taken the time to research this much needed biography and chastened that I am not doing more to assist in such valuable endeavors. Instead, I am posting articles that no one reads besides myself and ten other people in the world. Ah well. Here I sit and research for the dissertation; I can do other. :) Awadewit | talk 01:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Small comment Could you add somewhere in the lead when he moved to the US? Right now the narrative is a bit nebulous - it is only at the end of the lead that the reader realizes he lives in the US. Awadewit | talk 02:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Y Done Added. – Scartol · Talk 11:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support Just wonderful. Comprehensive, clear, and Achebe is an endlessly fascinating subject. DBaba 02:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, well written and comprehensive article.--Grahamec 03:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. I don't think the images of the Laos skyline and the University by night really add to the article. - Mgm|(talk) 08:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree they're not the best images in the world, but given the lack of anything else related to the article (the only free image relating to Conrad I could find is this image of a boat he sailed on.) Do you think the article would be better without these images? (I really dislike big blocks of text.) Or do you have suggestions for alternatives? Thanks for your input. – Scartol · Talk 11:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I believe the article would be better without them, but I'd be happy to consider alternatives, or wait out other opinions on the matter. - Mgm|(talk) 11:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I believe these images are preferable to large blocks of text - both aesthetically and for ease of reading. Awadewit | talk 12:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Support Really good article.--Tamás Kádár 15:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Still not agree on the images, but it's not serious enough to make me oppose. - Mgm|(talk) 19:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Kudos to all who worked on this article! It's really close to FA IMO. There are still some issues I'd like to see being addressed before this is article is promoted nonetheless:
    • "He is best known for his first novel, Things Fall Apart (1958), which is perhaps the most widely-read book in modern African literature." Aren't there statistics about what the best-selling book in modern African literature is? That would be a much stronger claim that "perhaps the most widely-read".
  • Y Done I removed the word "perhaps". The original quote in Ogbaa states: "Things Fall Apart is unquestionably the most widely read, best-selling, and influential book in modern African literature." Do you think I should include the whole thing? – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "His parents stood at a crossroads of culture". I'm assuming this is referring to the crossing of traditional African and Western Christian culture. Is that correct? Could you just add a few words explaining this a bit further?
  • Y Done I added a phrase to clarify. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "Chinua's mother and sister Zinobia Uzoma continually told him stories as a child, which he repeatedly requested." "continually" is an exaggeration, generally not a good idea for Wikipedia in my opinion.
  • Y Done Fixed. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "At the age of twelve, Achebe moved to the village of Nekede, four kilometers from Owerri." Did his family move with him? Might be worth mentioning...
  • Nope, it was just him. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "Although he was also accepted to the equally-prestigious Dennis Memorial Grammar School in Onitsha, Achebe attended Government College in Umuahia from 1944 to 1948." I'm no expert in grammar, but isn't "equally-prestigious" just an adverb followed by the adjective it modifies? Why the hyphen then? Please excuse me, if this is accepted by British English or some other non-American dialect.
  • Y Done You're right. Removed the hyphen. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "These earned him a "Major" classification and a scholarship to study medicine." Why the quotation marks around "Major"?
  • Y Done Often they are used to indicate that the term is used in a particular instance, but I don't think they're necessary here. Removed. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I don't really understand why Achebe got a scholarship to study medicine, but then had a "year of grueling work in physics". Were the physics classes part of his studies in medicine?
  • Y Done I suppose so. To avoid confusion, I changed it to the more general "science". – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • ". It produced a plethora of remarkable writers in the years before and after Achebe's presence there, including Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka, novelist Elechi Amadi, poet and playwright John Pepper Clark, and poet Christopher Okigbo." It could be argued that "remarkable" is POV. Why not well-known, famous, or notable?
  • Y Done In my opinion, "remarkable" and "notable" are nearly identical synonyms, but "famous" works for me. Changed. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "Although the group was well-received by students and faculty, Achebe was "shocked" by the harsh realpolitik he met in the US." The realpolitik towards the conflict in Nigeria/Biafra? Its unclear because the preceding sentence deals with slavery in the US.
  • Y Done Clarified. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "In 1980 he met James Baldwin at a conference held by the African Literature Association in Gainesville, Florida USA. Baldwin was likewise eager to meet Achebe, and said "It's very important that we should meet each other, finally, if I must say so, after something like 400 years."[124]" Could you expand this paragraph? It doesn't really say what the two talked about and why this meeting is of any importance.
  • Y Done I had more on Baldwin earlier, and removed it for non-notability. I suppose this is less clear by itself as a result. I've added a sentence of perspective. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • "Achebe has been called "Africa's greatest novelist of the 20th century",[178] and many books and essays have been written about his work over the past fifty years." Who called him that?
  • I agree that the passive voice is generally yucky, and I avoid it as a rule. However, given that this sentence appears at the beginning of the legacy section, is clearly sourced, and would require an awkward rephrasing to place it in the active voice, I'd argue for leaving it as is. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
        • If this quote is just by someone who reviewed Achebe's book, who is not relevant from a wider historical or literature point of view, then it might not be that important. Most writers are considered the greatest writer by someone.
          • Y Done Changed to a different quote, this one from the Man Booker Prize press release. (Surely they're relevant from a wider historical POV.) – Scartol · Talk 10:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
    • The "Legacy" section is riddled with weasel words.--Carabinieri 23:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Y Done – sort of. I've gone over and over this section, trying to guess what you mean. Can you be more specific? There are many superlatives in this section (in quotations), but I believe that's simply a function of the man's incredible importance and influence. Everything is carefully cited, and the descriptions have been chosen to reflect the tone of the works being cited.
  • The penultimate paragraph, perhaps, is part of your concern – but as the two articles referenced in it serve to demonstrate, it's not a fringe belief, and I feel I've fairly presented the claims. Maybe you can explain where these weasel words are?
  • I was, in fact, mostly referring to that paragraph. It might be worth adding one or two notable examples of such scholars to the first sentence. The second sentence seems to present the view that Achebe was "a literary champion of his people..." as fact. Please see this FAC discussion on why, in my view and in that of two other FAC reviewers, it is not appropriate to present a quote like this sentence does. The first sentence of the second paragraph is also weasel-ish (I love that "word"). Could you add one or two notable examples of such writers? Ok, I see that's done in the rest of the paragraph, sorry :)--Carabinieri 00:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Y Done I removed the quote and rephrased the sentence to read: "Despite his scholarly achievements and the global importance of his work…". – Scartol · Talk 10:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you kindly for your detailed comments. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Support. A fine article, as I said during the peer review. Lovely to see another literature article at FAC. All power to Scartol's elbow.qp10qp 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose To comply with WP:ENGVAR, this needs Commonwealth English spellings (this is not optional). --ROGER DAVIES TALK 14:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
While I appreciate the desire for consistency, I must respectfully disagree. At the FAC for Vindication of the Rights of Men, you said: "it seems churlish to withhold support on WP:ENGVAR grounds for what remains an extremely well-written article." If you believe this article is not well-written, please let me know; I believe my work above, in peer reviews, and elsewhere on Wikipedia will testify to the fact that I deserve good faith and will do my best to fix the problem.
But I believe that – insofar as most of the works I read about Mr. Achebe are in AmEng (including, I believe, the biography, though I don't have it in front of me at the moment) – there is no urgent need for conversion of this article into the Commonwealth variation. Indeed, given Mr. Achebe's view that the English language must be reworked and expanded to fit the needs of varying discussions, a case might be argued that AmEng – spellings from a rebellious former colony – might be more well-suited to this article.
I am of course open to other perspectives and discussion. Thank you for your feedback. – Scartol · Talk 15:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining your reasoning :) WP:ENGVAR is crystal clear. Achebe is Nigerian. The official language of Nigeria is English, with Commonwealth spelling. Therefore, articles about Achebe must follow that style. The reason for WP:ENGVAR is to avoid turf wars over spelling variants. It also acknowledges that Nigerian schoolkids looking up a national icons in Wikipedia are entitled to find an article using the spelling they're used to. I hope this clarifies things. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 16:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Nigeria hasn't been a British colony since 1960, so I see no reason to enforce British English on this article. Many former British colonies now use a hybrid AmEng/BrEng/local dialect owing mainly to the strong influence of the U.S. in business affairs (and the internet). Besides, Chinua Achebe's life and writing are subjects of international interest, and he currently lives and teaches in the US, so I see no compelling advantage to having it in one dialect or the other. As he has done before, I imagine Roger will accuse me of having a bias in this matter (despite the fact that I have written entire articles in British English when the subject calls for it). Kaldari 16:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not talking about colonial status. Nigeria's constitution specifies English as the official language and provides an official example of the national variety. (I also regularly use American English; see my contributions to the American Battle Monuments Commission series.) --ROGER DAVIES TALK 16:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Roger Davies himself has stated that the Joseph Priestley articles does not need to be in BE, since JP emigrated to America and lived there for ten years. Wouldn't the same logic apply to Achebe, whether or not Nigeria had ever been a colony? Awadewit | talk 16:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, but that's not the way it works, is it? It's not my personal opinion that counts, or yours, but what reflects Wikipedian concensus developed over six years. The national variety rule is used daily without complaint by tens of thousands of editors on Wikipedia. I really don't see what the fuss is about. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 16:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
As I said, I'm willing to discuss this, but I'd rather do it on the article's talk page (or on mine, or someone else's). I respectfully disagree with your opposition, and I think we should leave it at that in this space. – Scartol · Talk 17:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I perfectly understand though WP:ENGVAR is not my opinion, it's consensus.--ROGER DAVIES TALK 17:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Update I'm itching to support this well-written and well-researched article but the discussion with Scartol simply hasn't taken place. I would still like to know why this article went from Commonwealth English to American English and, if the {{MoSElement}} template on the talkpage is to be believed, ring-fenced off that way. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 13:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Following discussions with Scartol, this is now resolved. If anyone is interested, the discussion is here and mostly here. It seems we each inadvertently irritated the other and communication suffered. Lesson learned there I think. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 15:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support An excellent article, full of interesting detail and richly satisfying. For me, this article seems to strike a nearly perfect balance between scholarship and reading pleasure for the lay-person; it's smooth, easily understood, has strong flow, engages the reader and yet works in a wealth of information about its subject. Well done! :) Willow 19:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. This is an exhaustively inclusive and brilliantly intelligent article that has been both well written and put together. Furthermore, it was a joy to read. María (críticame) 13:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.