799:, I think I've made appropriate use of old and new sources. I have, wherever possible, tried to back up key facts with citations from more modern sources. Bowen and Woodbury are simply used to verify facts (where the regiment was on what date, etc.). There is no escaping the fact that the best source of information on the regiment, and therefore the source on which I rely most heavily, is the regimental history. I can understand your concern about it being considered a primary source. I think an argument can be made that it is a secondary source given the fact that Walcott weaves together numerous accounts that he gathered and he was not actually with the regiment for its entire term of service (although, admittedly, he was there for much of it). Still, I think his work is a synthesis and not simply a memoir.
363:, (a source I've already included) provides plenty of information about the connection between Plunkett and Clara Barton. So, I've removed the online source, re-written the sentence a little to better reflect what Prof. Oates had to say, and replaced the ref with Oates. I imagine this is where the website author got his information in the first place.
631:'s career after the war...Col. Clark's article is another one of my pet projects and I should have thought of it. So, I've added a paragraph. Thanks! I tried to dig up some info on reunions or other members who went on to make notable achievements but couldn't find much. I'm sure there were others, but I just haven't come across any info yet.
854:
It has to do with the way it was uploaded. It can be fixed though. You just need find a published version of the shield in a book, or somewhere, saying it is what it is. Then put a reference on the image page saying where it can be verified. Otherwise who knows if it really the right patch or not? I
604:
I peer reviewed this and thought it was quite good - since then some more modern sources have been added and a questionable one replaced, and I think this now meets the FA criteria. Well done. My only suggestion (and this does not detract from my support) is to wonder if there is any more that could
173:
I am nominating this article for featured article status because I believe it meets the criteria. I also believe there is a scarcity of FA's pertaining to individual regiments in the
American Civil War. While there are plenty of wonderful FA's on battles, campaigns and generals, there are very few
714:
The age of
Walcott, Woodbury, and Bowen as sources is potentially a problem. The bulk of the article is sourced from them. Are there no more modern comprehensive sources? Bowen is littered with northern propaganda terms, and may not be entirely neutral. Woodbury is likewise a tribute book to the
241:
Thank you for pointing that out. It can get a bit confusing with different sources using many different combinations of the words
Massachusetts, Volunteer, Infantry and Regiment. But their regimental history uses 21st Regiment MVI, so I'll stick with that and have fixed the inconsistencies.
582:
No worries, it looks good. I don't know if the last two are requirements at FA, as I've not had much experience reviewing at this level. The criteria page does not seem to indicate that they are requirements. I might have missed something, though. Anyway, happy to support now. Well done. —
137:
386:
I think I've taken care of this. The "publisher" I had originally listed at the title of the work. This is a self-published website, but in accordance with wp:source, I think it's kosher to use because it's simply providing evidence that the subject organization
925:
It might be a personal style thing, but you might consider adding commas in the lead before "during which" and "including". I notice other places where an optional comma might be inserted, given that you do use them liberally in some places ("In May 1862, the
982:
Following your lead, I also enlarged the
Chantilly image a tad. It was just too difficult to see any detail at the default size. The Burnside's Bridge image looks great. I was fascinated when I found that on the Commons. Did you upload
175:
816:
I have removed the forced images sizes (I didn't know about that policy) from all the images except for the two in the infobox (these, I think, need to be forced in order to keep the infobox a reasonable size, especially the top
684:"One of the most disastrous for the Union army was the Battle of the Crater during which explosives were detonated in a large mine tunneled beneath the Confederate entrenchments, temporarily creating a gap in their lines."
358:
Good point. I had originally felt it was reliable because the article has a good bibliography. But, after going over wp:source again, I think you're quite right--this is not a good source. Fortunately, Stephen Oates in
868:
The last line of the Battle of New Bern section quotes the number 58 for casualties, but the math provided at the end in parenthesis seemingly contradicts this. Is this an error, and if not, can the info be clarified?
500:
also, with the same section, I suggest perhaps renaming it "Legacy", if only to remove the "The" from the title, which I believe is generally not considered good form (I can't remember if there is a policy on this,
827:. Is that something that can be fixed within this article, or is it an issue with the way the file was uploaded? If it presents a problem, I'll take the image out, although I think it's nifty to have in there.
88:
83:
92:
563:
I haven't used the {{harvnb}} template before, but again, if that's considered the standard for FA's I'll certainly add it. Probably would be good for me to learn that method anyway, so I'll work on that.
75:
929:
The thousand down to a hundred men: were 900 killed or injured, or did that include resignations, etc. It's dramatic, so it would be nice to know rather than let it hang until the details below.
711:
I believe the books sources listed in "References" should have the years of publication in parentheses, like this: (2006). You may want to consider use cite templates for the references.
179:
153:
79:
855:
am striking my oppose per you response regarding the older sources. I don't personally have access to the newer sources, and accept your response in good faith. Good job! —
976:
This is a great point. It was rather mysterious as written. I've added a follow-up sentence describing the various reasons for the losses...how many killed, wounded, etc.
1005:
913:
894:
878:
859:
845:
764:
640:
620:
592:
577:
533:
446:
432:
419:
396:
372:
334:
313:
299:
283:
251:
234:
225:
204:
191:
128:
71:
64:
722:
Some of your sources are available in full or in part on google books, it would be appropriate to link to them there to better help reader verify their contents.
490:
in the
Consolidation with the 36th Massachsetts section, the word "reenlist", should it be "re-enlist"? You have used "re-enlist" previously (i.e. in the lead);
690:"The famous Civil War nurse, Clara Barton, was born and raised in Oxford, Worcester County, Massachusetts and knew many of the men in the 21st Massachusetts"
40:
158:
560:
I've used {{citeweb}} for websites but I haven't used a citation template for books. I'll certainly add them if it's considered standard for FA.
557:
I like "Legacy." Come to think of it, it's consistent with a lot of other historical articles, so I've changed it according to your suggestion.
174:
describing the war with regard to the experiences of a single unit over the course of the war. The article has received a general peer review
542:
The last sentence of "Organization" has a reference. I'm guessing you meant the last sentence of the first paragraph. So, I added one there.
30:
17:
986:
I'll avoid the unintended alliteration in the future. I can't think of a better word for failed, though, without it sounding judgmental.
938:
Just a small thing for the future: "Following these failed assaults" ... in normal prose, I'd avoid the f ... f if it's easy to do so.
935:
Couple of images I enlarged a bit. Is the
Burnside bridge better on your system now? (Interested to know.) It's a good pic, isn't it.
230:
Why is the article title (21st
Regiment MVI) different from the name used in the lead and on top of the infobox (21st MVI Regiment)?
485:
in the
Northern Virginia Campaign section, in the first sentence I think there is a typo - "suppose" should probably be "supposed";
1001:
890:
841:
636:
573:
442:
415:
392:
368:
295:
247:
187:
124:
715:
north, but read more neutrally from my skimming of it. Walcott was a member of the regiment, and his book could be considered a
605:
be said about the legacy? Did any of the veterans become prominent politcal officeholders, for example? Did they have reunions?
672:"On September 1, the regiment, now numbering 400, marched northwest from Centreville with the rest of Ferrero's brigade."
678:"In the latter engagement, the 21st acted as rear guard and bore the brunt of a fierce attack but held their position."
518:
only a suggestion: the individual citations could be linked to the ref section with {{harvnb|author surname|year|p=#}};
997:
958:
886:
837:
632:
569:
438:
411:
388:
364:
291:
243:
183:
120:
666:"The 21st, numbering 675 men, led their brigade in the march on New Bern, discovering many abandoned fortifications."
669:"In their advanced position, the 21st suffered significant casualties and was soon forced to abandon the brickyard."
588:
529:
404:
The Catton book was originally published much earlier than 2004, it should note the original publication dates.
708:. Both would be appropriate for an article of this type to link to the greater articles encompassing this one.
325:
a fine piece of work. Nice to see something of historical signficance here rather than another video game.
824:
747:
269:
584:
525:
675:"The 21st, leaving two companies behind at South Mountain for guard detail, now numbered only 150 men."
480:- there is an example in the Battle of New Bern section that does not (16 miles, should also show kms);
182:. I think the resulting suggestions and edits have brought this article up to FA candidacy. Thanks!
946:
539:
Thanks very much for your comments. I appreciate the corrections. I've addressed them as follows:
909:
874:
856:
761:
756:
Overall a well wrote and interesting article. My primary concern in the source, and therefore I am
610:
309:
279:
349:
212:: 5 images; all public domain due to age or government creation. All images have good captions. --
681:"Now numbering less than 100 men, the regiment had been reduced to a tenth of its original size."
554:
I've always used "reenact"—it's in
Webster's. ("Reenlist" is not, so that should be hyphenated).
429:
743:
It generally appropriate to put links in image captions. Only the lead image caption has links.
796:
716:
509:
330:
53:
792:
735:
628:
474:
231:
201:
200:. No dab links, no dead external links. Alt text present and good after I made a few edits.
954:
219:
905:
870:
606:
305:
275:
942:
after the dash before "Apr" in the infobox? You could afford to spell out the months.
775:
Refs: I've added citations for each one of the sentences or paragraphs you've listed.
627:
Now that you mention it, I am embarrassed that I didn't include something about Col.
425:
262:
785:
I've added a "See also" section with a link to the ACW Portal and some other links.
696:
Paragraph starting with "During July, two additional divisions.." has no citations.
656:**"The 21st, about 900 strong, boarded the steamer Northerner on January 6, 1862."
326:
138:
Featured article candidates/21st
Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry/archive1
109:
802:
I've added links to the References section for books available on Google books.
950:
705:
214:
424:
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool.
495:
in the The 21st Massachusettes today should "reenacting" be "re-enacting"?
788:
I've reformatted the references section using the "cite book" template.
461:: Overall I think this is very well done, I have a couple of comments:
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
465:
the last sentence of Organization and early duty needs a citation;
470:
distances and values etc. should be converted using the template
410:
I've added the original publication date in the references list.
770:
Thanks for your comments. I've altered the article as follows:
687:"More than two-thirds of the remaining men chose to re-enlist."
350:
http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~cwirish/TPlunkett.html
505:
only a suggestion: the References could be formatted with
163:
704:
There is no see also section or a link to the featured
105:
101:
97:
57:
734:
You are forcing images sizes, this is discouraged by
989:
Got the paragraph mark. Months are now spelled out.
693:"They arrived in Newport News, Virginia on July 9."
1011:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
545:Missed that conversion. Thanks. It's been added.
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
823:I'm not sure what to do about the sourcing on
72:21st Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
65:21st Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
1017:No further edits should be made to this page.
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
290:Missed that one. It's been added. Thanks.
178:and a Military History Project peer review
885:That was an error. I've fixed it. Thanks,
142:
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
968:Thanks! I've made the following changes:
941:A small thing: could you put a <p: -->
738:unless there is a good reason to do so.
145:
135:
932:"fewer than 100", not "less than 100".
820:I've added wikilinks to the captions.
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
7:
437:Thanks very much for your comments.
273:; can you please add that? Thanks.
24:
380:Current ref 55 lacks a publisher
791:After a careful re-reading of
1:
647:Comments from Charles Edward
593:22:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
578:12:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
534:10:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
447:19:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
433:16:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
420:19:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
397:19:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
373:19:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
335:21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
314:17:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
300:11:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
284:09:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
252:19:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
235:18:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
226:17:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
205:15:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
192:15:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
129:15:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
31:featured article nomination
1034:
758:Opposing per criterion 1c.
304:Looks good; thanks again.
267:, except it's missing for
1006:15:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
914:01:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
895:16:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
879:18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
860:16:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
846:16:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
765:17:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
641:16:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
621:01:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
1014:Please do not modify it.
36:Please do not modify it.
568:Thanks again. Cheers,
998:Historical Perspective
961:) 12:49, March 6, 2010
887:Historical Perspective
838:Historical Perspective
825:File:IXcorpsbadge1.png
748:File:IXcorpsbadge1.png
633:Historical Perspective
570:Historical Perspective
439:Historical Perspective
412:Historical Perspective
389:Historical Perspective
365:Historical Perspective
292:Historical Perspective
270:File:IXcorpsbadge1.png
244:Historical Perspective
184:Historical Perspective
121:Historical Perspective
750:- image has no source
979:Fixed "less than..."
56:02:35, 8 March 2010
352:a reliable source?
963:
949:comment added by
617:
551:Added "re-enlist"
171:
170:
132:
1025:
1016:
962:
943:
629:William S. Clark
615:
585:AustralianRupert
548:Added "supposed"
526:AustralianRupert
514:
508:
479:
473:
361:A Woman of Valor
265:is good (thanks)
222:
217:
143:
117:
113:
95:
48:The article was
38:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1012:
944:
614:
512:
506:
477:
471:
220:
215:
86:
70:
68:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1031:
1029:
1020:
1019:
1008:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
987:
984:
980:
977:
974:
973:Got the commas
965:
964:
939:
936:
933:
930:
927:
917:
916:
898:
897:
882:
881:
865:
864:
863:
862:
857:Charles Edward
849:
848:
836:Thanks again.
834:
833:
832:
831:
830:
829:
828:
821:
818:
811:
810:
806:
805:
804:
803:
800:
789:
786:
780:
779:
776:
762:Charles Edward
754:
753:
752:
751:
745:
739:
725:
724:
723:
720:
717:Primary source
712:
709:
699:
698:
697:
694:
691:
688:
685:
682:
679:
676:
673:
670:
667:
653:
652:
646:
644:
643:
624:
623:
611:
598:
597:
596:
595:
566:
565:
564:
561:
558:
555:
552:
549:
546:
543:
522:
521:
520:
519:
516:
503:
497:
492:
487:
482:
467:
452:
451:
450:
449:
422:
407:
406:
400:
399:
383:
382:
376:
375:
355:
354:
345:
338:
337:
319:
318:
317:
316:
287:
286:
255:
254:
238:
237:
228:
207:
169:
168:
167:
166:
164:External links
161:
156:
148:
147:
141:
140:
134:
133:
119:Nominator(s):
67:
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1030:
1018:
1015:
1009:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
988:
985:
981:
978:
975:
972:
971:
970:
969:
967:
966:
960:
956:
952:
948:
940:
937:
934:
931:
928:
924:
923:
922:
921:
915:
911:
907:
903:
900:
899:
896:
892:
888:
884:
883:
880:
876:
872:
867:
866:
861:
858:
853:
852:
851:
850:
847:
843:
839:
835:
826:
822:
819:
815:
814:
813:
812:
808:
807:
801:
798:
794:
790:
787:
784:
783:
782:
781:
777:
774:
773:
772:
771:
769:
768:
767:
766:
763:
759:
749:
746:
744:
741:
740:
737:
733:
731:
730:
727:
726:
721:
718:
713:
710:
707:
703:
702:
700:
695:
692:
689:
686:
683:
680:
677:
674:
671:
668:
665:
664:
663:
661:
660:
658:
657:
650:
649:
648:
642:
638:
634:
630:
626:
625:
622:
619:
618:
608:
603:
600:
599:
594:
590:
586:
581:
580:
579:
575:
571:
567:
562:
559:
556:
553:
550:
547:
544:
541:
540:
538:
537:
536:
535:
531:
527:
517:
511:
504:
502:
498:
496:
493:
491:
488:
486:
483:
481:
476:
468:
466:
463:
462:
460:
459:
454:
453:
448:
444:
440:
436:
435:
434:
431:
427:
423:
421:
417:
413:
409:
408:
405:
402:
401:
398:
394:
390:
385:
384:
381:
378:
377:
374:
370:
366:
362:
357:
356:
353:
351:
346:
343:
340:
339:
336:
332:
328:
324:
321:
320:
315:
311:
307:
303:
302:
301:
297:
293:
289:
288:
285:
281:
277:
274:
272:
271:
264:
260:
257:
256:
253:
249:
245:
240:
239:
236:
233:
229:
227:
224:
223:
218:
211:
208:
206:
203:
199:
196:
195:
194:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
165:
162:
160:
157:
155:
152:
151:
150:
149:
144:
139:
136:
131:
130:
126:
122:
116:
115:
114:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
66:
63:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1013:
1010:
919:
918:
901:
757:
755:
742:
732:
728:
662:
659:
655:
654:
645:
609:
601:
523:
499:
494:
489:
484:
469:
464:
457:
455:
403:
379:
360:
347:
341:
322:
268:
266:
258:
213:
209:
197:
172:
159:Citation bot
118:
69:
54:SandyGeorgia
49:
47:
35:
28:
945:—Preceding
651:Needs refs:
348:What makes
210:Image check
904:Good job.
797:WP:Primary
706:Portal:ACW
524:Thanks. —
996:Regards,
906:TomStar81
871:TomStar81
793:WP:Source
736:WP:Images
701:General:
613:<: -->
607:Ruhrfisch
306:Eubulides
276:Eubulides
959:contribs
947:unsigned
778:General:
510:citation
501:though);
458:Comments
456:Support
426:Ealdgyth
342:Comments
263:Alt text
198:Comments
154:Analysis
50:promoted
920:Support
902:Support
809:Images:
729:Images
602:Support
475:convert
387:exists.
327:Dincher
323:Support
259:Comment
146:Toolbox
89:protect
84:history
232:Ucucha
202:Ucucha
93:delete
983:that?
951:Tony1
926:..").
817:one).
612:: -->
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
1002:talk
955:talk
910:Talk
891:talk
875:Talk
842:talk
795:and
637:talk
589:talk
574:talk
530:talk
443:talk
430:Talk
416:talk
393:talk
369:talk
331:talk
310:talk
296:talk
280:talk
248:talk
216:Pres
188:talk
180:here
176:here
125:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
52:by
1004:)
957:•
912:)
893:)
877:)
844:)
639:)
591:)
576:)
532:)
513:}}
507:{{
478:}}
472:{{
445:)
428:-
418:)
395:)
371:)
333:)
312:)
298:)
282:)
261:.
250:)
190:)
127:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
59:.
33:.
1000:(
953:(
908:(
889:(
873:(
840:(
760:—
719:.
635:(
616:°
587:(
572:(
528:(
515:;
441:(
414:(
391:(
367:(
344:-
329:(
308:(
294:(
278:(
246:(
221:N
186:(
123:(
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.