Jump to content

Talk:Isaac Franklin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 14:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that a bust of notorious slave trader Isaac Franklin was placed on the prow of his slave ship, Isaac Franklin? Source: Rothman, Joshua D. (Apr 20, 2021). The Ledger and the Chain: How Domestic Slave Traders Shaped America. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 9781541616592. p. 248 "[...] the Isaac Franklin had one other very distinctive feature. Described as a “man bust head,” it was a carving of the head and torso of Isaac Franklin himself, affixed to the prow."
5x expanded by Generalissima (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 38 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article is newly 5x expanded and certainly long enough. The majority of sources used are either peer-reviewed academic journal articles or books from respected academic publishers, so I have no issues with accepting offline sources in good faith. The dated sources (1931/1943) are used sparingly and in appropriate context. Earwig returns no likelihood of copyright violation, although as noted a number of sources are offline. The article is well written and I see no neutrality issues - assessments of his actions are appropriately attributed to sources and contextualised. Possibly some additional commentary from modern writers could be included in the #Legacy section at some point, but this is not critical for the DYK nom. The hook is interesting – you had plenty to choose from – and reliably sourced as per the quote. The images used are correctly licensed, and QPQ is done. Thanks User:Generalissima for bringing this article on a significant historical figure up to scratch - I would see this as needing very little work to get it to GA/FA status if you would like to pursue a nomination. ITBF (talk) 10:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Isaac Franklin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 06:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 20:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I will be reviewing this article as part of Good review circle 3. I'll be using the table below. Comments to follow soon! Unexpectedlydian♯4talk 20:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.


1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
  • References and citations are in the correct sections and well-formatted.


2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).

Source review

  • No issues found with the reliability or relevance of sources.

Spot check

  • I will start by reviewing approx. 10% of citations.

Rothman 2022

  • p.167 - Don't think this page number or source is correct.
  • p.227 checkY
  • p.249 checkY


2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.