Talk:Boot Monument

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
Please feel free to leave comments.
After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boot Monument article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Boot Monument has been listed as one of the Art and architecture 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 2, 2024	Peer review	Reviewed
April 17, 2024	Good article nominee	Listed
September 6, 2024	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 25, 2024. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a boot* is the only monument in the United States dedicated to the traitor Benedict Arnold because it "was the only part of Arnold not to later turn traitor"?*
Current status: Good article

Military history: Memorials / North America / United States / Early Modern / American Revolution

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military memorials and cemeteries task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)
	American Revolutionary War task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Visual arts: Public art

	Visual arts portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
	This article is supported by the public art task force.

United States: Revolutionary War / Military history Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - American Revolutionary War task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

New York (state): Capital District Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Capital District (assessed as Low-importance).

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Gibbet quote

I really think the gibbet quote is extraneous and belongs only in the B. Arnold article. Anyone think otherwise? If so, why? The quote deals with Arnold and his treason, not the monument.

The gibbet quote was in wiki land when I started editing. I found a reference on print google] doing a search for benedict+arnold+gibbet. Yes, I agree it's probably apocryphal but there is a reference to do it and it should be cited in that context. Americasroof 21:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the incident didn't happen, it seems to have been a widespread "urban legend" during the early 19th century, and is somewhat connected to the monument. AnonMoos 16:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

What is the policy on sources? I added the Randall source after I made the Boot Monument new entry because Randall is where I got the information to begin with. The Sneiderman source has been added without any new information being offered that could have come from it: should it be left in or removed? Troyvarsity (talk) 13:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No name

In the A&E Biography of Arnold, a historian says that near the monument is a wooden sign pointing to it that mentions Arnold's name, but that the monument itself does not refer to him because a law was passed by Congress that made it illegal to chisel or engrave Benedict Arnold's name. Anyone have any more info on this? Jimpoz (talk) 04:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

there are 5 monuments in the northeast which explicitly state his name, so i doubt there is a specific law against so doing. 2601:19C:527F:A660:885F:5C4B:CCA0:E796 (talk) 21:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment; Suggestion

Relativity I have assessed the article as B. I think the criteria are met. I suggest moving the last paragraph of Aftermath to the next section on betrayal. It seems to me to be repetitive where it is now but could be either an introduction to betrayal, or maybe omitted altogether. The section on betrayal seems to be a full explanation of the reason for the odd figure on the monument. I think it can be viewed as satisfactory from that viewpoint. Otherwise, there is a separate in-depth article. Donner60 (talk) 09:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Donner60: Moved. Thank you ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 21:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Off topic content

I saw this listed for a peer review, but there's one significant issue that needs to be addressed before anything else about the article can be evaluated. Currently, it goes WP:OFFTOPIC by giving more coverage to Arnold than the monument itself. The background section should really only be one or two paragraphs to give the basic context of who Arnold was and what action led to the monument. A good rule to follow is that the information in the article should be found in sources about the monument itself. If something in the article uses a source that has no mention of the monument, the info is probably out of scope. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Relativity as the one who requested the peer review. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien Thanks. When I have a significant chunk of time I'll shorten it. ‍ Relativity 23:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien: Done, shortened. Thanks for your advice. ‍ Relativity 23:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Nominator: Relativity (talk · contribs) 02:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Harper J. Cole (talk · contribs) 11:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take on this review. --Harper J. Cole (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harper J. Cole Thank you so much! Let's see how this goes; I've reviewed articles but haven't actually been the nominator for a GA review. I'll be pretty active in the next couple of days. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Some comments; let me know what you think.

His horse, who was shot as well, fell on Arnold's leg and his leg shattered. The text flows better if you can avoid repeating words; I'd suggest instead His horse, who was shot as well, fell on Arnold's leg and shattered it.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, the word "battle" occurs ten times in the Background section, including six times in the first two sentences. While the various "Battle of..." references can't be changed, you could vary things up outside of that, e.g. his contributions to the first of these, or just use a synonym for battle instead (fight, conflict, etc.)

Done Hopefully that works... ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American General Benedict Arnold had contributed significantly to both Battles of Saratoga, although his contributions to the first battle, the Battle of Freeman's Farm, are disputed. A bit contradictory; the first part of the sentence firmly states that he did contribute, then the second part says that he might not have done. Could it be reworded for more consistency?

I removed "significantly" since Arnold did contribute to the first Battle of Saratoga, just it wasn't that substantial. Do you think that works or should I reword that still? ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...resulted in Arnold's command being removed, and having it given to General Benjamin Lincoln. A bit over-elaborate with the wording. I'd suggest simply ...resulted in Arnold's command being removed and given to General Benjamin Lincoln.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British General John Burgoyne, on October 17, surrendered. I'm not sure you need this line, as it's straying a bit from Arnold's contribution. If you keep it, rephrase as British General John Burgoyne surrendered on October 17.

True; any person who wants to find out about the outcome can just see the corresponding article.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gates did not mention much of Arnold's contributions... Slightly awkward wording; how about Gates did not make much mention of Arnold's contributions...

I like it.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can wikilink Congress.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...a slab of granite to commemorate Arnold "would not do". The period goes inside the quote marks in US English, which is applicable to this article.

Done. I also realized I forgot to add a citation at the end of that and I've added it now. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...hang the rest of his body on an effigy. Normal would be ...hang the rest of his body in effigy.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...it should be commemorated". As above, the period should be inside the quotes.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few college boys on a trip Based on the source, we don't know how large a group of boys was involved.

Done Changed to College boys on a trip ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...which is Tour Stop #7. A bit random; no other mention is made of a tour during the body of the article.

Done Yeah, it isn't really discussed widely in sources. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One error in the inscription was that Arnold did not earn the rank of Major General prior to, and because of, Saratoga, but he did regain his seniority. I'm a bit confused by this; surely he did become a Major General beforehand, and the error is in suggesting that he only did afterwards (so "prior to" should read "after")?

Aha, gotcha. Changed to "after"

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In an old cadet chapel at West Point, Revolutionary War generals are honored there with a plaque on the wall, but Arnold's plaque only mentions his date of birth and death date, but not his name. The word "there" looks superfluous, and "but" should only be used once.

Reworded to In an old cadet chapel at West Point, Revolutionary War generals are honored with a plaque on the wall, but Arnold's plaque does not have his name on it, and only mentions his date of birth and death date. Hopefully that works. Thoughts? ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: reworded to only mentions his birth and death dates so it's not repeating the word "date" twice. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a couple of [page needed] tags to resolve on citation 3, plus one on citation 34.

I tried resolving those previously, but the books I cited them from didn't have page numbers. I'll let you know if I can figure it out. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so, update: I placed Aryes' book on hold at my local library, so once I get that I can (hopefully) check the page numbers. I got Holmes and Smith-Holmes' book as an ebook, but it still doesn't show page numbers. I learned, however, that the info is in the seventh page of chapter 3. Other than that, I don't really have page numbers. Do you think it would be okay if I count pages and just say in the citation "page so-and-so, excluding introduction" or something like that? It's not that long of a book. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I found the page numbers for Holmes' book. Never mind. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harper J. Cole:

Done Added page numbers ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harper J. Cole (talk) 20:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - just three outstanding points.

I'd suggest the wording ...although the extent of his contributions to the first battle, the Battle of Freeman's Farm, are disputed.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It now says "on effigy", but the expression is "in effigy". It's an odd phrase, but if you look at the source that's the wording they use too.

Done That is an odd phrase. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That just leaves the one remaining [page needed] tag.

Done ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harper J. Cole (talk) 23:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good by me now - promoted. Congratulations on your first GA. Harper J. Cole (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harper J. Cole Thank you for taking the time to take on this review! I'm very excited about it. Cheers! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 23:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The Boot Monument at Saratoga National Historical Park

... that the Boot Monument (pictured) never mentions the name of its honoree because he was a traitor? Source: [1] [2] and Martin, James Kirby (1997). Benedict Arnold, Revolutionary Hero: An American Warrior Reconsidered. New York University Press. ISBN 0814755607
- ALT1: ... that the only monument to a traitor in the United States is a boot? Source: Tonsetic, Robert L. (2013-07-19). Special Operations in the American Revolution. Casemate. ISBN 978-1-61200-165-4.
- Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Relativity (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 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.

‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Comment: It has appeared on DYK before, but not in bold print. (See talk page for more details) ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)-->[reply]
I'll review this. Have read about this subject before. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Relativity: Nice work. ALT0 is good. I'm not sure ALT1 works however as the source only says that it is Arnold's only monument on American soil whereas the hook seems to apply to all American traitors. I also thought of another potential hook that might be decent: ... that a boot is the only monument in the United States to traitor Benedict Arnold because it "was the only part of Arnold not to later turn traitor"? That would require another reviewer, though. Let me know what you think; but ALT0 is good to go. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with ALT0. Thank you for taking on the review! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT2 checks out and would make a good quirky.--Laun chba ller 09:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]