Talk:Elliott Fitch Shepard/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 13:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 14:08, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some initial notes; more later today, if I get time.

~~"one of three sons of a president of a bank note engraving company": surely "the president", not "a president"?~~

I think both work, but I'll change it.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"he earned the title Colonel": I think "Colonel" would more usually be described as a rank, not a title. This occurs in the body too: I'd make "received the title 'Colonel'" into "was given the rank of 'Colonel'".

You're right, fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Elliot's brother Augustus D.": any reason to include the "D." here?~~

Usually middle names or initials are written on Wikipedia as further identification and sometimes as disambiguation. It's encyclopedic and verifiable, so why not?--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but we have "Augustus Dennis" one line above, so there's no need to repeat the "D.", is there? It doesn't give the reader any new information. If you feel it's better as is I'll let it go but I think it looks odd. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:07, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't remember I had 'Dennis' in there. Done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The variously named bank note companies in the first paragraph are confusing because it's not apparent from the discussion that the company Augustus becomes president of is the descendant of the one his father was president of. I think a little rephrasing is needed.

I didn't ever look into the fact that the two companies were related, but I didn't think it relevant. I just wanted to state that EFS's brother and father were presidents as background. I wouldn't say this is the place to elaborate on the companies' relation.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point that it's only marginally relevant and we don't want to digress. It came up because I was wondering if there was a good target link for National Bank Note Company; there is, but it's just a redirect to the one you do link in the next line. Perhaps we could compress this a little and omit some detail: "Fitch Shepard was president of the National Bank Note Company, and Elliot's brother Augustus later held the same position", optionally with a footnote to say that by the time Augustus was president of the company it had become the American Bank Note Company if that's worth mentioning. How does that sound? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:07, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By then it's not exactly the same position, so it's sort of misleading. I really think this bit is fine as-is.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Meant to strike this the other day; not sure I agree with you but it's a matter of opinion not a GA issue. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:38, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Elliott was noted to be prominent by birth and ancestry": the Google Books source for this just lists him in the index, but it appears the text can't be viewed. I'd suggest just dropping this; he's clearly prominent from the other information in the article, and this doesn't really give the reader any new information. Of course if you can get hold of the book itself there's likely to be good material in it.

The source is here: link. I'd like to keep the text, but I've changed the reference to be more specific and use that link.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With the link I agree we can keep this. I'm not crazy about the phrasing, which is antique, though it's hard to paraphrase. I've struck this, but you might consider putting the phrase in quotes and attributing inline; it's more a statement of opinion from one source than it is a fact about Shepard. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:12, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I think that although it naturally has some subjectivity, it nevertheless is accurate to him, judging from much of my research. But I decided to change it, take a look now.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I like it better with the attribution. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:34, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"inspect, uniform, and quip": presumably should be "equip"? Looking at the source I see that it should, but in fact that sentence is a little too close to the original and should be paraphrased further. ~~I also don't think "as a compliment to him" is the right phrasing for modern ears; perhaps "in his honor"?~~

I don't think it needs further paraphrasing. I kept it because it simply and concisely states his influence on the regiment. He inspected, uniformed, and equipped them. That's too simple to mess with or for anyone to claim as a copyright violation. As for the next suggestion, I agree; fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:15, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "inspect, uniform and equip" is fine, but the entire sentence is little changed. The article says "He had not visited Jamestown from infancy until 1862, when he came as Colonel to inspect, uniform, and equip the Chautauqua County volunteer regiment; many citizens assembled to welcome him to his birthplace" and the source says "He had not visited Jamestown from infancy until he came as a Colonel to inspect, uniform, and equip the Chautauqua regiment of volunteers, in 1862, when a large number of the leading citizens assembled to welcome him to his birthplace." I think this is too close. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All I can often do is change around a few words; I'm really not quite sure how else to mention in one sentence very drastically different about him not visiting until coming to equip the regiment, where the citizens greet him (filling in all of the rest of the details too).--ɱ (talk · vbm) 16:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about "In 1862, he visited Jamestown to inspect, equip, and uniform the Chautauqua regiment; this was the first time he had returned to Jamestown since he was twelve years old, and he was welcomed back by a group of Jamestown's leading citizens."? "Twelve years old" can be cited to the Cyclopedia link. We don't need to say he was a colonel because we just mentioned that a sentence earlier. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:49, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 01:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Shepard informed George of his promotion, and may have influenced his promotion to the rank of major." Suggest "his subsequent promotion to the rank of major in 1865".~~

OK.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:15, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you have "Shepard was later" put in charge ..."? I don't see any evidence in the source that this was after the events in the previous paragraph; in fact it seems it could well have preceded his return to Jamestown.

Every of his many biographies list the Elmira command after his Chautauqua regiment posting, but none do state 'later'; I suppose I'll remove it.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason not to mention the story from his obit about the attempt to nominate him as VP at the 1892 Republican Convention?

It didn't seem very significant, being only someone else's attempt to nominate him, nonetheless an actual nomination or election. What do you think?--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Also, per this, he was at the convention and briefly took the chair to allow the chair to speak; not sure if it's worth including but I thought I'd mention it.~~

I don't think it's worth mentioning.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I agree it's a pretty trivial fact. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~You say he met and married Margaret within a year, but the NYT obit says it took several years, and that the reception was before the end of the war, which implies at least three years.~~

The New York Times obituary has several errors, including that one. Most sources say they met in 1867 and they married in 1868.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, struck. You might mention the discrepancy in a footnote, but that's optional. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, per his obit in the Reading Times the obstacle to the marriage was the opposition of Margaret's father. I can clip the article for you if you don't have access.

Can you link that? Not sure if I'd be able to view it.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is; sorry about the delay. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:42, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also found this source, which you may not have seen; not a GA requirement for you to add anything from it, but I thought you might be interested. Most of it is in the article already, but there seems to be enough on his involvement in the Chamber of Commerce to add something; I'll post more links later. But not necessary for GA, as I said.

Thanks, I used both.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 01:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More in a bit; I only got partway through the article so I'll read on and post more notes if I see anything else. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:42, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"The church building and manse were donated by his wife Margaret Louisa Vanderbilt Shepard": we just had his wife's name a sentence or two above, so I think you can make this "The church building and manse were donated by his wife", or "by Shepard's wife".

done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 01:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest making it "Shepard died on the afternoon of March 24, 1893".
I think you've misread the NYT obit. He was given ether at 1, not oxygen; the oxygen was evidently shortly afterwards. Also, he died about twenty minutes after 4, not twenty minutes after 1.
"While New York University's Elliott F. Shepard Scholarship was annually awarded from funds given by Shepard": looks like an incompletely edited sentence. Should that be a comma at the end, not a period?

fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 01:37, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have Margaret's death date given incorrectly in the infobox.

fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 01:37, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through yesterday's edits, everything looks fine. Once you fix the description of his death I'll pass this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 17:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. This is now GA. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, it's been good working with you.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:51, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]