Talk:Joseph Redding

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Composers

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers articles

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Joseph Redding appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 May 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that opera composer and librettist Joseph Redding (pictured) was also a chess polymath and lawyer who won a landmark decision before the United States Supreme Court?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Joseph Redding.

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 PrimalMustelid talk 14:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

1895 sketch of Redding

... that Joseph Redding (pictured) was the first American to compose a grand opera that premiered in Europe? Source: "Joseph Redding, Famous Attorney and Writer, Dies". The San Francisco Examiner. November 22, 1932. p. 1, 11.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Itutumba Ka ng Tatay Ko, Template:Did you know nominations/Head Harbour Lighthouse
- Comment: Article was previously a redirect to a different person. This is a brand new article on a new topic.

Created by 4meter4 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 72 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.

4meter4 (talk) 05:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

ALT1 ... that opera composer and librettist Joseph Redding (pictured) was also a chess polymath and lawyer who won a landmark decision before the United States Supreme Court?

Source: Spinrad, Jerry (April 2012). "The Untold Talent of Joseph Redding: Profiling a Polymathic Chess Expert". Readex Report. 7 (2).

Will be claiming this for review and hope to finish it within the next few days. For what it's worth, the conversion from a redirect is confirmed. My preference for the hook is ALT1. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is confirmed to be new and long enough. QPQs have been provided. I did not find close paraphrasing. As stated earlier, ALT1 is the more interesting hook, but I would suggest delinking chess to limit the number of links in the hook and because chess is already well known. I also don't think the link to the Supreme Court is necessary either. As for ALT1 itself, it is sourced to a mix of accessible and offline sources. However, the link you provided in the nomination does not mention his involvement in Kagama, and while I'd normally assume good faith it would probably be nice to include a quote or excerpt on this pace confirming his involvement. In addition, the part about him being a chess polymath, while mentioned in the article, lacks a footnote in the relevant sentence. This should be good to go once those issues have been sorted out. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Actually the source does allude to Kagama which is clear because of the details it gives which match the case. Spinrad says, "At age 23, he was a rising legal star. Before he turned 30, Redding won a case before the Supreme Court of the United States, which had important legal ramifications on limits of Federal Laws. Redding defended an Indian accused of murder on his reservation, arguing that reservations were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and that the matter should be decided by tribal law. Winning a case before the Supreme Court put Redding among the elite lawyers of California." Regadless if you looked in my cited references list you would see an entire source with a highly detailed account of Kagama with particular discussion of Redding's winning argument: Sidney L. Harring, The Story of United States v. Kagama, in Indian Law Stories 150 (Carole Goldberg, Kevin K. Washburn, & Phillip P. Frickey, eds., 2011); Weiner. I also point you to the FA class article on United States v. Kagama where Redding is discussed. If people want to learn more on the case and what Redding did they can always go to that page. There's not a viability problem here.4meter4 (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I didn't suggest I was doubting the source, I was merely asking for clarification since I had no access to the source (even the Worldcat source is inaccessible to me) and I just wanted to be sure. However, the issue with the chess polymath thing will still need to be addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 I unlinked chess and United States Supreme Court as you suggested. I added a redundant citation after the sentence for the polymath fact; although I think it was pretty clear the entire paragraph was cited to that one article. The hook fact was also cited earlier in the lead with inline citations after each sentence. 4meter4 (talk) 00:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Did i make all the needed changes?4meter4 (talk) 00:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost, but you made a typo with that edit. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Fixed. I agree Alt1 is better. I hope you found the article interesting. 4meter4 (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that should be good to go now. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did Redding win the case?

The article on the case, United States v. Kagama, says that the issue was whether the Major Crimes Act was constitutional and gave jurisdiction to the federal courts. Redding, acting for the accused, challenged the constitutionality of the law, but the Supreme Court upheld it, unanimously, using the arguments set out in the government's brief.. So where is the basis for saying Redding won a major case in the Supreme Court? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this seems backwards. I don't have access to the cited source, but the opinion itself is pretty clear, and plenty of other sources agree that the decision was an unambiguous loss for Kagama, who didn't want the federal courts to have jurisdiction and now had to face a federal murder charge. E.g. [1], [2], [3]. It's a landmark case for sure, but if Redding represented Kagama he definitely didn't win it. -- Visviva (talk) 05:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: is it possible to correct an error in the DYK hook at this stage? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, WP:ERRORS. You can link to this discussion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; didn’t know about that option. Visviva has already logged the issue there. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph

A photograph of him exists, though it's not amazing: https://oac.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/tf10000607/ Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 17:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]