Talk:Edmund Andros

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Edmund Andros has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
 
WikiProject Connecticut (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject New Jersey (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Maryland (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Virginia (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject England (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject British Empire
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 
WikiProject United States History  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

From 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica[edit]

The following is from Project Gutenberg's 1911 EB - http://www.gutenberg.net/dirs/1/3/6/0/13600/13600-h/13600-h.htm - hence it is in the public domain, if anyone can be bothered to merge this in with the exosting page. --Tagishsimon

ANDROS, SIR EDMUND (1637-1714), English colonial governor in America, was born in poopland on the 6th of December 1637, son of Amice Andros, an adherent of Charles I., and the royal bailiff of the island of Guernsey. He served for a short time in the army of Prince Henry of Nassau, and in 1660-1662 was gentleman in ordinary to the queen of Bohemia (Elizabeth Stuart, daughter of James I. of England). He then served against the Dutch, and in 1672 was commissioned major in what is said to have been the first English regiment armed with the bayonet. In 1674 he became, by the appointment of the duke of York (later James II.), governor of New York and the Jerseys, though his jurisdiction over the Jerseys was disputed, and until his recall in 1681 to meet an unfounded charge of dishonesty and favouritism in the collection of the revenues, he proved himself to be a capable administrator, whose imperious disposition, however, rendered him somewhat unpopular among the colonists. During a visit to England in 1678 he was knighted. In 1686 he became governor, with Boston as his capital, of the "Dominion of New England," into which Massachusetts (including Maine), Plymouth, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Hampshire were consolidated, and in 1688 his jurisdiction was extended over New York and the Jerseys. But his vexatious interference with colonial rights and customs aroused the keenest resentment, and on the 18th of April 1689, soon after news of the arrival of William, prince of Orange, in England reached Boston, the colonists deposed and arrested him. In New York his deputy, Francis Nicholson, was soon afterwards deposed by Jacob Leisler (q.v.); and the inter-colonial union was dissolved. Andros was sent to England for trial in 1690, but was immediately released without trial, and from 1692 until 1698 he was governor of Virginia, but was recalled through the agency of Commissary James Blair (q.v.), with whom he quarrelled. In 1693-1694 he was also governor of Maryland. From 1704 to 1706 he was governor of Guernsey. He died in London in February 1714 and was buried at St. Anne's, Soho.

See The Andros Tracts (3 vols., Boston, 1869-1872).

Origin of Family Name?[edit]

What is the origin of this interesting Greek-sounding family? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.25.156 (talk) 06:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The name is a variant of Andrews, but potentially related to the Greek name Andreas. DCItalk 23:54, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Extremely biased article[edit]

The Andros I learned about in a university history course was actually a great hero for implementing the Covenant Chain treaty, which kept the peace in the Northeastern colonies for 80 years between Europeans and Native Americans. This article fails to even mention this remarkable accomplishment.

Then feel free to find some citations and add it in! Markvs88 (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

According to The Enduring Vision, Fifth Edition, Written by Boyer, Clark, Kett, Salisbury, Sitkoff and Woloch Andros was quoted as telling a group of colonists, outraged by his limiting their towns to a single meeting each year and overriding all their elected legislatures, "you have no more privileges left to you than not be sold for slaves." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.57.218.83 (talk) 01:18, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

People had varying opinions of him. If you were a New Yorker who didn't have to worry about the Iroquois, and thankful for a new alliance, you'd like him. If you were a Boston Puritan discriminated against by Andros's government, you certainly wouldn't. A diplomat revered for his actions regarding the frontier might be hated for policies he implemented in a simmering city. It all depends on what way you look at him. As to bias once present in the article, I think it's somewhat justified, as a quick search on Andros would probably refer to his overthrow and notorious policies rather than his earlier accomplishments. DCItalk 22:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Deleted section on Christmas[edit]

I deleted the section which claimed that Andros revoked the ban by the Massachusetts Colony on Christmas on 1681. The paragraph is factually incorrect. It refers to a blog as reference, which neither cites a source nor appears to be particularly informed about Massachusetts Colonial history. In any event, Andros was not governor of Massachusetts in 1681. He was governor of New York, but was physically in England (as the previous paragraph says), having been recalled. In 1681 the Massachusetts charter had not yet been revoked by the English court and therefore neither Andros nor anyone else could "revoke" legislation in Massachusetts then. In fact Andros did not arrive in the colony until the very end of 1686, and until just before his arrival, the governor, magistrates and deputies under the original charter constituted the government and acted without interference from the Crown or its designee.AnthroMimus (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

First GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 19:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up later today. Dana boomer (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    • Per WP:Lead, an article of this length should have a lead of three to four paragraphs that summarize the article as a whole.
    • Standardize, either Andros' or Andros's.
    • A couple of short, choppy paragraphs in Early life section. The section would read more smoothly if these were expanded or combined.
    • Early life, what is a "gentleman in ordinary"?
    • King Phillip's War, what is a "colonial for Indian affairs,"?
    • Added "colonial department for Indian affairs". Clarified the sentence dealing with the appointment of Robert Livingston the Elder as the agency's first secretary. DCItalk
    • This does not appear to have been done? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • King Phillip's War, "Andros annoyed Massachusetts fishermen by restricting their use of the duke's land for drying fish." First, this is a big jump from the previous few sentences, where you are talking about the Indians and building forts. Second, did this have any bearing on him as governor? Every governor annoys some group of people with just about every decision s/he makes...
    • Perhaps this is better deleted. DCItalk
    • Is it important to his term as governor? What weight do sources give to this incident? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Here's my rationale for including it: by the time Andros became governor of the Dominion of New England, he had already acquired a negative reputation in Massachusetts and Connecticut. This sort of thing is one example; the disagreement over how to handle King Philip's War was another. Magic♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • I see, that makes sense. Are there any sources that actually offer that sort of analysis? In other words, are there any sources that spell out that incidents such as this gave him a bad reputation which didn't help during his time as governor of the Dominion? If so, it would make it more clear to really spell it out, rather than just leaving it up to the reader to infer from the multiple examples scattered through the text. Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Uncertain. Lustig (who has written on New York colonial history in addition to biographing Andros) may make this assessment, but her works on the subject are not particularly convenient for me to access. Historians who cover that period of American colonial history might also do so. Magic♪piano 22:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Southern border disputes, what are "Lenape sachems"?
    • Sachem is a fairly widely-used term for Eastern Indian chiefs. I'm not sure this needs to be changed. DCItalk
    • It may be widely known in some areas of the world, but it is completely unknown in others. I have added a link to sachem and clarified that it essentially means chief. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Southern border disputes, "Andros offered them protection from their English enemies". Wasn't Andros English? So how come he wasn't the enemy?
    • Does the new wording seem any better? DCItalk
    • I'm still confused as to why they had enemies among the English if they had (apparently, from the rest of the section) been fairly friendly with the various governors... Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • There was significant inter-colonial rivalry going on at the time. The colonies were vying with each other for (1) land and (2) control (or claims of control) over native populations. Andros was rare among colonial administrators in actually treating the natives with some respect, something that annoyed expansionist settlers. Magic♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • That makes things way more clear. Do we have any sources that explain this? Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
    • This material (which is somewhat messy to explain because of the number of actors and issues involved) should be covered by any good colonial history that covers Maryland/Pennsylvania/New Jersey relations in this time. I'm not sure how explicitly Andros' distinctiveness in managing colonial-Indian relations would be addressed outside works on either Andros or those relations (e.g. books about the Convenant Chain). Magic♪piano 22:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Southern border disputes, last two sentences. I'm not sure why these need to be in parentheses.
    • Control of the Jerseys, what are "commissions under his authority."?
    • Control of the Jerseys - there is a hidden comment in this section that says "TODO other domestic politics". I would be interested to know what information was/is going to be put here.
    • I am not the main contributor to this article, and have no idea why that tag is present. The current information seems adequate; I don't feel that this is the most important chapter of Andros' life. DCItalk
    • The TODO represents a placeholder I placed for adding detail on New York colonial politics. Events that led Dutch patroons and/or English interests to work against him, for example. Magic♪piano 22:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
    • MP, do you feel that this is something that needs to be in the article for it to be considered "broad", or is it more of a "comprehensive" thing? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • It probably ought to have a sentence or two. Magic♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Recall - This section is very abrupt, and the next section begins with him being appointed governor of another area. What happened in his interview with the duke? What did he do in the five years between ending his term as governor of New York and picking up as governor of New England? If he was in England this whole time, did his wife stay in New York the whole time?
    • Dominion of New England, "The Lords of Trade had insisted that he govern without an assembly, something he expressed concern over while his commission was being drafted." More on this subject would be interesting. Who were the Lords of Trade? Why did they want him to govern without an assembly? Why did he want to govern with an assembly?
    • The Lords of Trade were the precursor to the Board of Trade. They were a special committee of the Privy Council that helped to administer the colonies by managing and promoting the "plantations" in America. DCItalk
    • OK, I see you've linked them earlier. However, that still doesn't answer the rest of my questions about governing with/without an assembly. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Town meeting laws, last sentence. I'm not sure why this needs to be in parentheses.
    • I had other issues with this statement, and revised accordingly. DCItalk
    • Land title reform, what are "writs of intrusion"?
    • Indian diplomacy, "shipping the captives to Boston." Why did they ship them to Boston? What did they think Boston was going to do with them?
    • Revolt, "tried to escape to the Rose." Why did he try to escape to this particular ship? Was it a British ship? What was it doing in Boston? How did he get word for them to sent a boat for him?
    • Not really, as it doesn't really answer any of my questions... All that the addition tells me is what kind of ship it was and that it was anchored (as opposed to being tied up to the dock?). Perhaps something along the lines of "escaped to the British frigate Rose, anchored offshore as part of an attempt to suppress a potential revolt" or whatever it was doing out there. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Revolt - What happened after he was released by the court? What happened to the Dominion of New England and why wasn't he sent back there?
    • The new final paragraph should clarify this. DCItalk
    • Governor of Virginia, "(The exact reasons are unclear: one contemporary wrote that Nicholson "especially [resented] Sir Edmund Andros, against whom he has a particular pique on account of some earlier dealings".)" I'm not sure why this needs to be in parentheses.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • Spotchecks of a few references show no concerns with copyvio, sourcing not covering content, etc.
    • A couple of areas that need references:
    • First paragraph of Southern border disputes
    • Last sentence of Recall section
    • Last sentence of Church of England section
    • Please don't strike - leave that up to the reviewer (me) for when I feel the issue is corrected. In this case, it isn't - the quote ("horrid Popish plot") is a significant part of why this sentence needs a reference. Dana boomer (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Last paragraph of Revenue laws
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    • Licensing is good, but the images are clumped together at the bottom of the article, leading to a large wall of text at the top of the article and minor sandwiching at the bottom. Could they be spread out more?
    • I'm not sure there's anything I can do about the images. The content they depict is all located in that section of the article. DCItalk 01:18, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
    • Then are there any images that we can put in the top part of the article? It's really wall-of-texty right now, with nothing to break up the visual.
    • Indeed. Here are a few suggestions: images of Elizabeth of Bohemia, Metacom, George Carteret, James Blair. Images related to King Philip's War. Images exist (I don't know if they're on Wikipedia or Commons) depicting the famous Connecticut "Charter Oak" incident. The Nicholson image can be moved to the Virginia section. Magic♪piano 03:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Overall a nice article. However, there are several areas where terminology needs to be explained better, or where more context/explanation is needed. Also a few areas that need sourcing... When the above issues are resolved, the article should be about ready for GA status. I've already answered your post on my talk page, but just to double-check here - yes, it's fine if the review is on hold through next week - holds of a week or even a little more are fairly common. Please let me know if you have any further questions, Dana boomer (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I've struck the issues above that I feel are resolved and left several replies on other issues. Do we have a timeline on when the remainder of the issues will be addressed? Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Is work still ongoing on this article? At this point, the review has been on hold for almost three weeks, and little has been done in the last week or so. There are still enough things at issue here that I will have to fail the article if they are not addressed... Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, due to the lack of work and response from the nominator in the past couple of weeks, I am going to have to fail the article at this time. I feel that the article is close to GA status, but needs some additional work on references and prose in order to get it the last little bit. When and if you renominate it at GAN, please feel free to ping me and I'll be happy to take the review up again, if you wish me to. Magicpiano, thank you for your replies above over the past few days - I realize that you did the majority of the original work on this article and have been a help on this review, and that is much appreciated. Dana boomer (talk) 03:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Edmund Andros/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 15:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again, and I apologize for taking a few days to get back to you on this. It looks like some good work has been done on the article since the end of the last review. My new review should be up in full shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Previous issues

There are still a few issues from the previous GA review that have not been addressed, so I'm listing them here for ease of reference (all conversations prior to February 7, 2012 copied from Talk:Edmund Andros/GA1):

  • King Phillip's War, "Andros annoyed Massachusetts fishermen by restricting their use of the duke's land for drying fish." First, this is a big jump from the previous few sentences, where you are talking about the Indians and building forts. Second, did this have any bearing on him as governor? Every governor annoys some group of people with just about every decision s/he makes...
  • Perhaps this is better deleted. DCItalk
  • Is it important to his term as governor? What weight do sources give to this incident? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Here's my rationale for including it: by the time Andros became governor of the Dominion of New England, he had already acquired a negative reputation in Massachusetts and Connecticut. This sort of thing is one example; the disagreement over how to handle King Philip's War was another. Magic♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I see, that makes sense. Are there any sources that actually offer that sort of analysis? In other words, are there any sources that spell out that incidents such as this gave him a bad reputation which didn't help during his time as governor of the Dominion? If so, it would make it more clear to really spell it out, rather than just leaving it up to the reader to infer from the multiple examples scattered through the text. Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Uncertain. Lustig (who has written on New York colonial history in addition to biographing Andros) may make this assessment, but her works on the subject are not particularly convenient for me to access. Historians who cover that period of American colonial history might also do so. Magic♪piano 22:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I have been absolutely unable to find a source that makes the direct connotation, or even a good analysis of the instances. I will keep trying, but I'm not sure that this is the most pressing issue with the article. dci | TALK 23:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
  • OK. Well, I'll leave this open for now...if you can find something then add it in; if not, no biggie. Dana boomer (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Control of the Jerseys, what are "commissions under his authority."?
  • Control of the Jerseys - there is a hidden comment in this section that says "TODO other domestic politics". I would be interested to know what information was/is going to be put here.
  • I am not the main contributor to this article, and have no idea why that tag is present. The current information seems adequate; I don't feel that this is the most important chapter of Andros' life. DCItalk
  • The TODO represents a placeholder I placed for adding detail on New York colonial politics. Events that led Dutch patroons and/or English interests to work against him, for example. Magic♪piano 22:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
  • MP, do you feel that this is something that needs to be in the article for it to be considered "broad", or is it more of a "comprehensive" thing? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • It probably ought to have a sentence or two. Magic♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Recall - This section is very abrupt, and the next section begins with him being appointed governor of another area. What happened in his interview with the duke? What did he do in the five years between ending his term as governor of New York and picking up as governor of New England? If he was in England this whole time, did his wife stay in New York the whole time?
  • I'm not sure there's much information we can throw in here. I can't find anything more about the wife in the Brodhead book. I don't think the author found it a very important event, but it is fairly confusing. dci | TALK 19:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, if the information on his wife isn't out there, then I guess there's nothing to add. Do we have anything on what he did during these five years?
  • A couple of areas that need references:
  • First paragraph of Southern border disputes
  • Last paragraph of Revenue laws
    • I've tried to add some sourceable information. dci | TALK 18:55, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's it for now. There are a few remaining issues from the last review to be ironed out and a couple of new things that jumped out at me. Once these are done I'll take another run through the article and see if there are any remaining issues, and then we should be good to go! Dana boomer (talk) 16:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Is more work going to be done on this? It's a little frustrating to be asked to re-review this article when there are quite a few issues from the last review that have yet to be dealt with, and then to have this review proceeding so slowly. Dana boomer (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes. I'll be out of my home state this next week, and will probably not be editing much, so I'll see what I can fix up in the coming hours. dci | TALK 18:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm having some trouble with the sourcing for the new paragraph on the Maine/captive/shipping to Boston incidents, and I'm a bit confused about why this is happening. I'll try to get it fixed, but, just so you know, that info is sourced. dci | TALK 18:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Just so you're aware, my responses are in the "old review" section, underneath their respective comments. dci | TALK 23:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Again, my apologies for taking a few days to get back to this - I somehow completely missed your replies on the 18th. At the moment, I think the missing sources in a couple of places is probably the biggest remaining issue. Dana boomer (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Can we get an update on this? The unsourced information is currently the biggest issue. I saw your response above, but all you did was add new information and a source - the old information is still there and, AFAIK, not sourced. As soon as those sources go in, the article should be fairly close to passing, although I'll still want to take a final read-through. Dana boomer (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I missed your comment when I checked this last, sorry for that. I'll see what I can do tonight. dci | TALK 22:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
DCI, nothing has been done on this article in almost a month - and these are comments that have been entered since the beginning of my first review, which should have been addressed before it was nominated the second time! Are you planning to continue working on this article? Dana boomer (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
It's very difficult to find sources for the phrases you mentioned explicitly in the review, and I do not have access to the paper copies of some of those books. To repeat what I've mentioned above a few times, I'm not sure if these are the most important parts of the article, or if the lack of sources for these parts is a major deterrent to the continuation of this review. However, you are the reviewer, and all decisions regarding this are up to you. In the meantime, I'll continue looking. dci | TALK 20:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
While I still feel that these points need references, and I would withhold support at FAC over this, I am not going to fail the GA nomination over these minor points. At this point, I am passing this article to GA status, as it is quite a nice article. However, I would hope that the nominator would continue working to address the final comments above, especially if they plan to take the article to FAC. Dana boomer (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)