Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic/archive1

Add links
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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 30 April 2021 [1].

Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic[edit]

Nominator(s): Kaiser matias (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A country, if one can call it that, which existed for little more than 6 weeks in the spring of 1918, the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic was formed out of desperation. A union of Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians, it was not likely to have lasted even if it wasn't facing an imminent invasion. I've slowly worked on this for the past while, and got it up to GA recently, and now think it is ready here. I will note a couple things: the dates used are a mix of Julian and Gregorian, a consequence of the era; and while this is nominally a "country" article, the fact that the TDFR spent nearly its entire existence trying to defend itself militarily means that there are not much that can be said about more conventional topics for country articles. Scholarship on the state as a whole is also limited, though a regional journal did publish some relevant articles in 2020 (which are being released in book form in 2021) that have proven quite useful. Kaiser matias (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding here, just getting caught up in things. Should have it all addressed by the weekend. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image and source reviews[edit]

  • I'm satisfied with image licensing (t · c) buidhe 21:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As the TDFR lasted only a month, it did not leave much of a legacy." This sounds like an opinion based statement, it may make sense to attribute to a source or else delete it. (t · c) buidhe 21:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not convinced that giving non-English names of entities which are not the subject of this article and have their own articles is helpful, since this info is or should be in the dedicated articles. (t · c) buidhe 21:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the image review. For you other two points: I'll take a look at the sources, see if I can support the statement; otherwise I'll remove it. And for your third point, I'm a little uncertain what you mean. Can you clarify for me? Kaiser matias (talk) 22:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For example, "Council of People's Commissars (known by its Russian acronym, Sovnarkom" with a footnote "Russian: Совнарком; short for Совет народных комиссаров, Sovet narodnykh kommissarov". I do not think the footnote is helpful. (t · c) buidhe 23:30, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand now, thanks. I had that as I felt it appropriate to include the Russian version, but I'm certainly not married to the idea and if it's felt to be unnecessary can certainly remove it. Also will note I modified the "Legacy" introduction to be more neutral. Kaiser matias (talk) 21:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hovannisian 1967, p. 75 Harv error: this link doesn't point to any citation. (t · c) buidhe 23:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed that (had the wrong year at first). Kaiser matias (talk) 21:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall it seems like the more recent sources could be used to a greater extent. (t · c) buidhe 11:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Source checks
  • Forestier-Peyrat 2016, p. 166 — problematic as the cited page does not mention the treaty of B-L
  • Zolyan 2020—mostly supports the content, I do not have access to the other source cited
  • Brisku 2020, p. 32—looks OK (t · c) buidhe 11:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at what I did regarding Forestier-Peyrat, and get that cleaned up. I also have PDF copies of most sources here, and am happy to supply if need be. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LouisAragon[edit]

Claiming my spot. Will review over the following days. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping Buidhe.
  • "The Commissariat initiated peace talks with the Ottoman Empire in March 1918, but that broke down quickly as the Ottoman refused to accept the authority of the Commissariat. The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which ended Russia's involvement in the First World War, conceded parts of the Transcaucasus to the Ottoman Empire, who continued their invasion of the region in order to take control of the territory." -- Why did the Commissariat iniate peace talks with the Ottoman Empire? What was happening at the time in the region? IMO this part needs further clarification.
  • "The South Caucasus had been conquered by the Russian Empire in the early nineteenth century, with the last annexations taking place in 1828" -- The Treaty of Adrianople hadn't been signed yet in 1828. Kars and Batum were taken through the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878). Do you mean the bulk of the South Caucasus? If you're referring to that, I suggest changing it to:
- "The bulk of the South Caucasus had been conquered by the Russian Empire in the first half of the nineteenth century through wars with Qajar Iran." OR:
- "Most of the South Caucasus had been conquered by the Russian Empire in the first half of the nineteenth century."
  • "Much like in Petrograd, a dual power system was established (...)" -- suggest changing to "Much like in Petrograd (Saint Petersburg), a dual power system..."

Most of these points are the same as the ones I posted earlier on the talk page of this article. Once they are addressed, I will have another look and give my support for promotion. Its a well written article. - LouisAragon (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Funk[edit]

  • Some nicely obscure history, will have a look soonish. Though my girlfriend is actually from one of the included countries, she had never heard of this state! FunkMonk (talk) 21:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At first glance, I wonder if O.S. has to be linked at every mention?
  • Still some names and terms that could be linked in image captions.
  • "the only other city of significance was Baku" State what country this is in today, as with Georgia?
  • There are also many terms after the intro that could need links at first mention in the article body.
  • "would continue to follow the Ottoman Sultan" Link to who it was at the time?
  • Mention (and link) the main ethnic groups of the region in the background section? You now list them in parenthesis under Transcaucasian Commissariat, but I think they could maybe all need some kind of more specific presentation.
  • "However they were concerned that the local population, who were mostly Muslims" is/was the Caucasus really majority Muslim?
  • "The South Caucasus was overwhelmingly rural: aside from Tiflis the only other city of significance was Baku,[8] which grew in the late nineteenth century as the region began exporting oil and became a major economic hub.[9]" Single sentence paragraphs are discouraged, could this be rolled into one of the adjacent paragraphs?
  • "and as it had acted at like a state when" The "at" doesn't seem to fit in?
  • "on their arrival an Ottoman official to quipped that" Seems like the "to" doesn't fit either?
  • "course of action; majority of the delegates" The or a majority?
  • It is a bit confusing that you seem to use Armenian/Dashnaks and Azerbaijani/Musavats interchangeably in places. Is it possible to somehow make this more consistent?
  • "The new republic, the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR)" and "The Ottoman Empire recognized the new republic, the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR)", do you need to spell it out and abbreviate it twice in succession? First time should be enough?
  • "Halil argued that as the two states are in conflict, the Ottoman would no longer recognize" A bit odd that this starts in present tense.
  • "bring the entire Armenia" Entirety of Armenia?
  • "as the Ottoman forcese" Forces?
  • "suggested that the real reason was to allow them a means to reach Baku." For what purpose?
  • "the Halil Bey" Any reason for the definite article here and not elsewhere?
  • The "German intervention" section doesn't really seem to imply much if any actual intervention? Maybe somethig more passive like "German position/opinion" or similar would reflect the content better?
  • Perhaps worth mentioning that the included states later had various armed conflicts with each other? Which would also underline the statement "seemed both to the actors at the time and to later scholars of the region to be unique, contingent, and certainly unrepeatable."
  • "dissolved in 1917 February Revolution" In the?
  • "While the three successor states would be reunited within the Soviet Union as the Transcaucasian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic, this would only exist between 1922 and 1936 before being broken up again into three union republics." Perhaps briefly state how this happened? Voluntarily or by force?
  • "as the Ottoman refused" Ottomans?
  • "the Armenians and Azerbaijanis each declared themselves independent" It seems a bit odd that you link these ethnicities here to their states instead of ethnicities, instead of linking the ethnicities at their first mention in the intro "three major groups (Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians". I also think you can spell out the full names of their republics at the end of the intro, as you did with the Georgian one.

Coordinator comment[edit]

  • Not much sign of a consensus to promote building for this article. So this is a heads up that if it hits the three week mark without a fair bit of further activity, then I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. I'll reach out to some projects and users, see if I can't get someone to take a look. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaiser matias:, can I remind you of "Nominators are expected to ... make efforts to address objections promptly." It would be helpful if you could respond to Buidhe's, Louis's and Funk's comments before the end of the weekend. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
KM doesn't seem to have been around for well over a week, I think we'd best put this one to bed for now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Transcaucasian_Democratic_Federative_Republic/archive1&oldid=1020780284"