Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Adair/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by GimmeBot (talk | contribs) at 11:17, 25 November 2012 (Bot tagging closed FAC discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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 Ian Rose 15:01, 22 November 2012 [1].

John Adair[edit]

John Adair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since undergoing a major rewrite earlier this year, the article was listed for peer review (which garnered exactly zero comments) and passed a MILHIST A-class review. A veteran of the Revolutionary War, Adair's promising political career was derailed when he was accused of participation in the Burr conspiracy. He was exonerated, but remained out of politics until after the War of 1812, where he led the Kentucky militia in support of Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans. His service, and his subsequent protracted and vehement defense of the Kentucky militiamen against Jackson's charges of cowardice, restored his reputation, and he was elected governor of Kentucky in 1820. Hope to respond quickly to any concerns. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Comments - taking a look now. Will jot queries below...Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you can, try to vary how each para in the lead begins - currently the second two both start, "Adair...." - a straightforward tweak might be "Moving to Kentucky in 1786, Adair participated in the Northwest Indian War,...."
Fixed. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Edward Lacey was elected sheriff of Chester County after the war, and Adair replaced him in his former capacity as the county's justice of the peace. - should the "justice of the peace" be capitalised as an official post?
It is not capitalized in the source, and I really don't remember ever seeing it capitalized. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's cool then, just struck me on how it read that it possibly should be, but I ain't no politics editor :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In January 1804, Garrard nominated Adair to the position of registrar of the state land office - does "registrar of the state land office" need to be capitalised?
Best I recall, this one is also not capitalized in the source. I have to consult that source again for another article; will try to remember to double-check at that time. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall a good read. The sentences are a little on the short side early on, but the prose is good further down the article. The dispute with Jackson makes entertaining reading. I think we're looking ok on prose and the article seems comprehensive. My only query is whether the published sources are in rough consensus over the dispute between Adair and Jackson, as the article seems somewhat pro-Adair (which may very well be true :) ) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:02, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found the Jackson-Adair controversy section fun to write as well. I suppose in retrospect it could read pro-Adair. Maybe I'll drop a note at Talk:Andrew Jackson and see if any Jackson biographers go into detail about it. It was obviously a much bigger deal in the life of a relatively minor figure like Adair than in the life of a U.S. president, but maybe someone knows of another source. Thanks for the review. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - just let keep us posted here :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I forgot to drop a note here. No response at all on Jackson's talk page. I did a little searching on Google Books, but few of the sources on the Jackson side give the incident more than a passing mention. One older source – can't remember which one right now, but it was full view (out of copyright) – gave it a few pages, and those correlated pretty well with what I found in the Filson Club article. That author opined that the incident showed that Jackson would not back down when he thought he was right, which to me, kind indicates that the author didn't think he was right. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • FN12: why include title here?
    • Because it's a web site, which is not a paginated source. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN11 vs 14
    • Oops. Forgot that article went onto a second page. Fixed. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check for template glitches like doubled periods
  • Filson Club History Quarterly, or Historical Quarterly? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments Alright, this article looks like it's in pretty good shape. I made a few copyedits, feel free to revert if I messed anything up. Very well written for the most part, just a few nitpicks:
  • in "where he was held captive by the British for a period of time." I'd remove the last five words.
    • I didn't want it to sound like he spent most of the war in captivity. See if my revision addresses both your concern and mine. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Adair was elected to a total of eight terms in the state House of Representatives between 1793 and 1803" I'd remove "a total of" here.
    • Again, there is a reason I used this wording, which was to convey that not all of those terms were consecutive. Is this too minor a point to justify keeping that wording, or do you have a better way to express this? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • For "He is the namesake of Adair County, Kentucky, Adair County, Missouri, Adair County, Iowa, and the cities of Adairville, Kentucky and Adair, Iowa." & "In addition to Adair County in Kentucky, Adair County, Missouri, Adair County, Iowa, and the cities of Adairville, Kentucky, and Adair, Iowa, were named in his honor." I'd suggest using semi-colons after the states for the first three listed.
  • I think you could use another paragraph break in "Early life".
    • Me too, but I didn't find much about his early life in the published sources. Would you drop the heading for "Service in the Northwest Indian War" and just make it one big section? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He assisted in the construction of Fort Greeneville in 1794, forwarding supplies to Anthony Wayne during his operations that ended in a decisive victory at the Battle of Fallen Timbers." I'd use "which" instead of "that" here.
  • Just a thought, but you might consider making a note that Senators weren't directly elected back then. Not a problem either way, but I imagine a few people may be confused about the legislature electing senators.
    • I always find this awkward. I know you are right that people may look askance at it, but I also wonder if it's worth breaking into the narrative for every senator elected before 1913 to explicitly call attention to it. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not a big deal either way, using a footnote might help avoid breaking the flow. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1802, Adair succeeded Breckinridge as Speaker of the House by a vote of 30–14 over Elder David Purviance, the candidate preferred by Governor James Garrard.[15] He continued to serve as Speaker for the duration of his term in the House." Just a thought, but is the second sentence necessary? I would assume that he'd serve as speaker for the rest of the term?
    • Changed to "tenure". If I'm not mistaken, representatives were elected every year at this time, which means he was chosen Speaker in 1802, reelected to his seat in 1803, and chosen Speaker again that year. Make sense? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After hearing testimony, the grand jury dismissed the indictment against Adair as "not a true bill", and similarly dismissed the charges against Burr two days later." Is there a good way around the "dismissed ... dismissed" here? Also, I'm not sure you need the second comma here.
  • "The complaint of a former Relief governor over the ill effects of pro-relief legislation prompted wry celebration among members of the Anti-Relief faction" Is "relief" capitalized/not capitalized correctly here?
    • I think so. My intent was that the first "Relief" referred to the party proper while the second referred to the idea of debt relief in general. I've clarified this by adding "Party" after the first "Relief". Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Barred from seeking a second consecutive term by the state constitution, Adair retired to his farm in Mercer County at the expiration of his term as governor." Is there a good way around the repetition of "term" here?
  • "In light of this evidence, it seemed strange that Jackson should now charge that the remarks had been forged by Adair." I think you might be able to end the sentence after "forged".
  • In the second-to-last paragraph of "Controversy with Andrew Jackson" you start a few consecutive sentences with "He...". Also, there are a few short sentences in the last paragraph of that section. Otherwise, that's all I have. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good comments, all, as usual. Thanks for the review, and let me know if I haven't sufficiently addressed any of them or if you find anything else. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alright, all of my points have been fixed or explained sufficiently, and it looks fine to me. I'm ready to support now, good work. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments While I'm not familiar with early American political history (especially in individual states), this article appears to be in very good shape. I have the following comments:

  • Try to avoid use of the term 'enemy' in regards to warfare as this involves coming down on one side of the engagement, can result in confusing prose and can usually be easily replaced. For instance in "The maneuver forced the enemy to fall back and allowed Adair's men to escape.[9] They retreated to their camp and made a stand, forcing the enemy to withdraw." it's unclear which side the second sentence is referring to.
  • U.S. Senate should be linked the first time it's mentioned
    • Oops. Dropped that sentence in after locating the information while working on another article. Failed to see that it changed the location of the first mention. Fixed. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "their civilian rifles" - does the source specify that these men were equipped with rifles? Smoothbore muskets were much more common weapons at this time, and rifles were typically only used by specialist marksmen
    • Yes, the source does say rifles in a couple of places, even mentioning that a legend exists that the outnumbered Americans won the battle because many of their soldiers were armed with rifles. I know there is a legend connected with a guy from my home county – Ephraim McLean Brank – that he was able to pick off British officers at a great distance with his rifle, contributing greatly to the American victory. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "mostly old flintlock rifles" - ditto
    • You're right on this one. The source here says muskets. Politics, I know. Military history, not so much. Changed. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 'Controversy with Andrew Jackson' section seems rather over-long (no other part of Adair's life receives comparable blow-by-blow coverage) - I'd suggest splitting this into a separate article and leaving a two or three paragraph summary in this article
    • I was afraid it might seem too long. There is a very long scholarly article on the matter, while few other sources address it in more than a couple of sentences. I felt it was necessary to go into this level of detail to explain why letters kept passing back and forth between the two. Each letter, it seemed, contained a new charge or counter-charge. If shortening this is a condition to your support, it may take a day or two of reflection to see what can be eliminated. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I think that this should be shortened. To be honest, I stopped reading it as its content was pretty arcane. I would suggest using it as the basis of an article on the topic, however, rather than deleting it outright. Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, I've made an initial attempt to shorten it while leaving in the details that explain the timing of the letters and explain why there was so much back-and-forth over the matter. I also dumped the original in my user space, per your suggestion. Maybe I'll get around to making that an article one day. What do you think now? Still too long? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 16:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the tumultuous economic environment, however, legislators routinely borrowed from the Literary Fund for other purposes" - were the legislators borrowing from this fund in their private capacity as this wording implies, or were they using it as a source of funds for the business of government?
  • Can more be said about Adair's position on the Missouri Compromise given its long-term consequences for the state?
    • I'm pretty sure a less-than-one-sentence mention is all any of the sources give about this. A Google Search for "john adair" "Missouri Compromise" turns up lots of results about Henry Clay, who followed Adair in the Senate and was largely responsible for drafting the compromise. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • On a related topic, what was Adair's position on slavery?
    • I don't recall running into anything about whether Adair owned slaves or supported or opposed slavery. During the time he was governor, the debt relief issue was almost exclusively the only one that mattered to most voters. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK fair enough. As I understand it, slavery didn't become a hot-button issue in the US until after this period. Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why did Adair stand for the federal House of Representatives? It seems an unusual thing for an elderly person who'd previously been a senator and governor to do.
    • I agree that it kind of seems random, since he didn't really do anything during his two-year term, so it's not like he had a real purpose for running. It may be that he didn't actively seek the position, but the people of his district elected him anyway. That happened sometimes during this period. There is one source that I don't have access to at this moment that I want to look at again and see if it provided any details, but I don't remember reading any. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just checked that last source. Nothing there either. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the find-a-grave link necessary given that the article describes where Adair is burried? Nick-D (talk) 23:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I never add Find-A-Grave links, but they show up on a lot of articles that I work on, so I usually leave them in place since someone else felt the need to add them. No problem with removing it, though, if you think we should. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'd suggest removing it given that the article explains where he's buried so there's no clear need for the link. Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support My above comments are now all addressed. Great work with this article. Nick-D (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - mostly OK, just some minor stuff (all Done):

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk)

  • "In 1806, however, Burr was arrested in Frankfort on charges of treason ...": Our Aaron Burr article says he was arrested for treason in 1807; I don't know, myself.
    • A New History of Kentucky gives trial dates in late 1806, so I don't think 1807 is possible unless he wasn't arrested before trial. Maybe there was another arrest in 1807 on different charges; I'm not sure. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "aides-de-camp": aide-de-camp
  • "six Americans were killed and seven others wounded": ... and seven wounded
  • "poorly-armed": poorly armed. Search for "ly-" and fix.
  • "based upon": based on, per Garner's and Chicago. (They reserve upon for events: "upon landing ...", for instance.)
  • "excusable.": Omit end-of-sentence periods in the middle of a sentence.
  • "Davis' ": Ten years ago, apostrophe rules weren't clear; the trend now is strongly in favor of "Davis's".
    • Really? I didn't know that. Fixed. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The trend is to add the 's if it the (singular possessive) word is likely to be pronounced that way. - Dank (push to talk) 17:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but friends of both men averted the conflict after assembling to watch, but no written evidence of the event exists": one "but" too many
  • - Dank (push to talk) 21:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. (Edits may take days to show up on that page.) - Dank (push to talk) 17:29, 21 November 2012 (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/John_Adair/archive1&oldid=524779954"