Talk:Nathaniel G. S. Hart/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Nathaniel G. S. Hart. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Suggestions for Improvements

A very well cited and interesting article but a few suggestions/ideas for further improvement

- A photo would greatly improve the article if possible
- More on Personal life to improve background
- Military Career Before 1812
- Improved Introduction with more information added

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Molestash (talk • contribs) 03:34, 26 October 2011‎

I've looked and looked and looked, there are no images of Captain Hart available anywhere online, I did find that photo of the Monroe Memorial. I'll see if I can find perhaps some pics of his family-homes.

I'll look and see what I can find about his personal life, the story about Elliott being a guest at Hart's family-home and then betraying him can easily be fleshed-out quite a bit.

Re: Military career...the coverage is quite sparse and this unit was a frontier-militia unit so the documentation is lacking (so many wooden structures burned down) plus frontier record-keeping wasn't always the best. I'll see what I can find, there's a mention in one of the sources that Hart might have gone to Princeton.

In the course of my research, other authors/researchers have also mentioned the lack of historical documentation especially regarding the American troops who were at Raisin/Frenchtown. There was a mix of regulars and militia and so many of the troops died that there wasn't much, if any, institutional memory.

Thanks for the feedback, I was looking at the criteria and had thought that the article was good enough for C-Class (it seemed to me to be in the league of the given-example), but I'm sure there's always room for improvement. I'll probably ask you for a re-assessment after a while.Shearonink (talk) 04:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I thought it met the criteria for C-class. I suspect the painting by Jouett will be the only extant picture of Hart, if it is, in fact, still extant. I didn't find it online either, but if it can be found, it would be PD, since Jouett is long-dead. Good luck in expanding this article. It is a needed addition, especially since a county is named after the guy. I hope you will also create articles about any of the other River Raisin victims you find enough information about. I understand that the information is sparse, but this was a really big deal in Kentucky history. Thanks for your work. Acdixon (talk · contribs · count) 15:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The MilHist WikiProject has assessed it as a B-Class, I'll just have to work to improve it on the other Projects' assessment-scales when I have more time. Shearonink (talk) 16:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the assessment by MilHist WikiProject and have revised the WikiProject Maryland class assessment to B. Folklore1 (talk) 12:37, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The two citation needed tags are inconsistent with WP:MILHIST assessing B1 as Yes, so I have revised this assessment to C class. Another inconsistency is that the military history assessment will appear on the page based on the ratings for B1-B5 at this level no matter what is entered for class=. The B level assessment left the entry for class at Start. For consistency among projects I have entered C for the class in all projects, which I realize may not be entirely consistent with their standards. --Lineagegeek (talk) 21:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Well I fixed the citation issues. I'm not sure I understand all the ins & outs of assessments but yeah...probably not consistent. I guess I'll try posting on those various projects and see if I can get newly-minted assessments from all the various projects. Shearonink (talk) 03:17, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject class assessments need not be consistent, as each project can have different quality assessment standards, as evidenced by the aforementioned standards of WikiProject Military History. Per our own assessment standards, I have restored the rating of this article to class B for WikiProject Maryland. ~ Erick Shepherd • (Talk) • 12:10, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK nom

Number of soldiers killed and number of survivors

I apologize for the two 'citation-needed' templates I added today but I've looked and looked and cannot find a reliable source for the specific numbers of 397 killed & 547 survivors. Battle of Frenchtown mentions an "official count" but then doesn't actually cite it. The casualty figures are repeated in various web sources, but I am concerned that they are repeating a self-perpetuating information loop. If someone can find this official count in whatever US Government report or official Army dispatch or War Department communique it possibly exists in and add the reference here and to the Battle of Frenchtown article, that would be most helpful. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 18:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Fixed, taken-care of. Shearonink (talk) 03:17, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Full citation needed

Lossing, Page 359. What is this? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I didn't put that ref in (that I remember), went out and found the complete information. VERY interesting book and facsimile editions are apparently available as reprints. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

It's there. I missed it.

Sorry, my mistake! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

It was probably orphaned in some series of edits - happens. I know when I looked at the article text there was nothing other than the last name & page reference... Shearonink (talk) 21:29, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That was exactly what I thought I saw. But it's gone now. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:39, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

? I think that's because I fixed it, so the "Lossing, Page 359" was replaced by my referencing wonderfulness. Shearonink (talk) 21:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Good job! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:46, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Btw, I found where the complete citation was removed. I can see basically see why, doesn't completely make sense to me but that's ok. Anyhow, all fixed-up now. Whew with all this work, maybe I will put it up for a GA.Shearonink (talk) 22:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Fixed 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Full citation needed

Pierre Berton's War of 1812 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Fixed 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nathaniel G. S. Hart/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Looks interesting, will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

No dablinks, no copyvio detected. Fairly well-written, only a few comments: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Lead

often Nathaniel G. S. Hart May be unnecessary. It is understood. (also see info box)
Looking at the length of the article, and per WP:MOSLEAD, the lead should be two to three good paras long, covering all the major points of the article.

Hart is rarely referred to in the historical literature by his full name, he is most often referred to by his first name/two middle initials/last name (and a persistent error has crept into some history books which mangles his two middle initials. If the Infobox is to be the the summary of the important points of the article, then his full name as well as his name with middle initials more commonly used should be delineated.

Re: the lede &WP:MOSLEAD. I was following the parameters laid-out in MOS:BLPLEAD. Hart was well-connected & popular in his home state of Kentucky, his ignominious death along with the deaths of his fellow soldiers galvanized pro-war sentiment across the United States so I tried to cover these points - his wartime service and death are what make him notable in the history of the United States. However, keeping your comments in mind I'll take another look at it when I have some more time sometime within the next few days. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I did not know of this misnomer business. Alright, we can retain the name. About the lead length, it is generally recommended to keep its length proportional to the article length, regardless of the topic of the article. So try to expand it to at least two good paragraphs covering most of the important points. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Take a look at the lede now, I've adjusted some of the content to be a bit longer. It seems to me that emphasizing why Hart's death was so shocking to the country and to the people of Kentucky is one of the most important aspects of the article. By the way, I looked around for the guideline about lede length and it's WP:LEADLENGTH. Taking a look at Page size, the readable prose size is 8656 B, so the now-present 2-paragraph lede seems appropriate. Shearonink (talk) 02:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Good job, but there seems to be some overciting near the name. You can do with three citations. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I know it looks bunched now but there is a technical issue with using "sfn/Harvard" refs combined with "Notes" that I do not know how to resolve more cleanly. I can usually nest the refs using "refn" but these are sf's... nesting a noted reference is very complicated to me even in the best of circumstance sometimes I have used a magic word but I cam trying the refn template. I do not want to lose the refs presently attached to the information and what the refs specifically address but am not sure how to adjust everything. I am working on this issue but that but it might take me a few days to see if I can resolve it. Shearonink (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Alright, that should not be an obstacle in promotion. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Duel

~~Looks like a very short section. Perhaps merge it with the next section?~~

I combined the Duel section with his Personal Life section. The duel was not a military act so placing it within the PersonalLife made more sense to me. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

It still stands as it was? Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I combined/merged it with Personal life - take another look. Seems to fit better there. Shearonink (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Military service and death

~~Looks choppy, please combine paras.~~

Did some combining. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I can't see where you did this... Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Take another look please. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

~~Wikilink Powatatomi~~

Ah, good catch, don't know how I missed that. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Name

~~You need to introduce Kleber and the Heidlers.~~
~~The paras can be combined.~~

You're right...doesn't really fit as a paragraph. (Kleber & the Heidlers are some of the historians - well-researched too - that I came across in my research on Hart.) I am converting the information in that section to a note. Anyone doing research needs to be able to follow the breadcrumbs & the sourcing for what the man's actual name was since his wrong name has been repeated so often in various histories and in official pronouncements. Will take another whack at the nested-referencing within the next few days or so. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Sure. And don't forget to add "historians" before their names, readers need to know who they are. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The issues resolved, I am happy to promote this beautiful article. Great job! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Nathaniel G. S. Hart. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nathaniel G. S. Hart. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)