Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cotswold Olimpick Games/archive1

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 SandyGeorgia 02:16, 16 July 2010 [1].

Cotswold Olimpick Games[edit]

Featured article candidates/Cotswold Olimpick Games/archive1

Nominator(s): Malleus Fatuorum 21:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many people believe that the modern Olympic Games were revived by Baron Pierre de Coubertin in 1894, but they're wrong; the Games were revived by Robert Dover, an English country lawyer, in 1612. Not much else is known about Dover, but as a Catholic, his Games may have been a reaction to the increasing Puritanism of the early 17th century. The Games have survived to the present day, featuring the ancient sport of shin-kicking. I promise, it's all true. Malleus Fatuorum 21:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - dab link to Thomas Randolph, weblink for "Old shin sport alive and kicking" is a redirect. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the dab link. Malleus Fatuorum 02:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why the dead link checker reports the link for "Old shin sport alive and kicking" as a redirect, because as far as I can see it isn't. Malleus Fatuorum 16:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because the URLs are slightly different? ("/1/" -> "/2/")

It's the other way around, "/2/" -> "/1/", but the link already points to /1/. Still not sure what's happening here. Does it really matter? Malleus Fatuorum 17:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not to me :). It's not dead, so I don't care either way, just thought I'd point it out. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:08, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - very interesting article, just my usual nitpicking below. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead shouldn't be more than 4 paragraphs
"the Games gradually degenerated into just another drunk and disorderly country festival according to their critics" - wording is informal, which I suspect reflects the source, but I would suggest either making this a direct quote or replacing "just another" with "a", "a typical", or similar wording
What on earth is "gmykhana"? Maybe include a brief description somewhere?
- Spelling mistake, fixed. Parrot of Doom 11:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Dover's motivation in resurrecting the Olympic Games may have had a military purpose rather than a cultural one" - his motivation had a military purpose, or he did?
"he joined ancient countryside practices "to classical mythology" - I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, is there maybe a word missing?
"an ideal that might explain why they captured the public imagination" - "they" here refers to the Games?
Whitsun or Whitsuntide or whitsun?
"perhaps also money for the other events" - perhaps? Source?
Link morris dancing, quarto and First Folio?
Who is Bolingbroke?
Full citation info for Abrahams should appear in Ref 9 or in Bibliography
Ref 26 requires subscription. Also, should match formatting for Ref 3
Publisher for Pevsner?
Why is Burns the only book to include location information?

Replies

Thanks for the review.

The lead is now four paragraphs.
"just another drunk and disorderly country festival" changed to "a drunk and disorderly country festival" as per your suggestion.
A gymkhana is an event in which kids on ponies typically dash up and down an arena moving things from one end to the other. They're pretty common over here. I've added a wikilink.
Changed to "Dover may have been motivated by military rather than cultural considerations".
Changed to "Dover combined ancient countryside practices with 'classical mythology and Renaissance culture ...'"
"Changed to "an ideal that might explain why the event captured the public imagination".
I've standardised on Whitsun
Citation added for "perhaps also money for the other events".
Links added
Bolingbroke is King Henry IV; I've added an explanation.
Ref #9 fixed
Publisher for Pevsner added
Location info for Burns removed

Malleus Fatuorum 15:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - meets FA criteria, very interesting article. Dincher (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Malleus Fatuorum 15:12, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Source comments: ~~Is the source "church ales" in lower-case, or should the first letters be in upper-case? Otherwise, fine. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

Support – Great, great article. Can't find anything to complain about, which is a rarity for me. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 14:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, and of course for the support. Malleus Fatuorum 15:12, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - This article seems disorganized. There are some important facts that seem missing or obscured.

Is it known on which years the event took place? The intro should state that the event occurred yearly.
Is anything known about the participants? The pole example indicates that women competed; have the games always included both genders?
Has the event changed at all over the years? Over hundreds of years, the lineup of events must have changed some. Nothing is said of the events for 80 years after the potential revival in 1660; is nothing known about that time?
How many people attended these events? Were there ever prizes? Did Dover or anyone else make money? Did they lose money? How popular were the games? Were they only a local thing?

It may be the case that the sources are lacking on these matters, but the article currently has relatively few sources for a very long lasting event, so I think there is considerable room to expand. ~~Andrew Keenan Richardson~~ 08:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replies

In what way do you consider the article to be "disorganised"?
The very first sentence begins "The Cotswold Olimpick Games is an annual public celebration of games and sports ...". What else would you have the article say? An annual event that takes place every year? It's not even certain which year the Games began and restarted, so it's not possible to be more precise about dates than the article already is.
Nobody knows whether the Games always included both genders, but they certainly did later on.
The events themselves changed, as the article already says. For instance, wrestling became shin-kicking.
There are no records of attendances beyond those already included in the article.
The article already explains that there were prizes.
Nobody knows whether Dover made or lost money in the staging of the event, as there are no surviving records.
The popularity of the Games, as reflected in the attendances and the distances people travelled to attend them, is already covered in the article. Nothing else is known.
If you know of significant sources that have been ignored, which I don't, then I'll be pleased to take a look at them. Otherwise there's not much I can do about your speculation that there must be considerable room for expansion other than to try and reassure you that there is not.

Malleus Fatuorum 13:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm puzzled by the above comments also, because I read the article and found that it answered all those points. I'd offer my support to this article but for the fact that I'm a minor contributor to it, and also that Malleus has just supported another article I've written (although he hasn't really touched that one). Maybe a support but not in bold :) Parrot of Doom 15:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Well written and very engaging. Maybe 'coursing' and 'cudgel' should be linked, as I had to look up what they meant. Tom (talk) 18:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to know what's well enough known not to need links and what isn't, but I've added links for coursing and cudgel. Malleus Fatuorum 21:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Withhold support till image issue is resolved~~ by Jappalang: I believe this well-written article is comprehensive enough, covering the formation of the games, its activities and rules, and its history (including its modern reincarnation). I do have some niggles on the content and text (not substantial for opposition, but hopefully can help to improve the article further when addressed) and suggestions below.

Lede

Is piano smashing to be taken literally? The name seems radical enough to wonder.
- Yes it is. Probably deserves its own article. Malleus Fatuorum 21:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proceedings

... officials called sticklers, which is the derivation of the phrase "a stickler for the rules".
It seems backwards here—the names of the officials are derived from the phrase? Should it not be "is the derivation for the phrase" (based on the question format "What is the derivation for <insert phrase or word>?")? I profess no expertise in linguistics, so some clarification here would prove helpful.

Revival

I am quite ignorant about fashion; is there anything special about a Holland shift, or is it just a fanciful term for an expensive blouse?