Talk:William Rath

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 Yoninah (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that William Rath is memorialized in a mural – drinking from a Fountain of Youth, a popular motif in the late 1800s?

Quote: "He is shown drinking from a 'Fountain of Youth,' something that was in vogue in the late 1800s." Source: The Colorful Murals of Ludington

• • ALT1:... that a mural of William Rath depicts him drinking from a Fountain of Youth? Source: Id.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tahitian Dog

Created by Doug Coldwell (talk) and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Nominated by 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:35, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline and I prefer ALT1, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Attribution

Text and references copied from William Rath to James Ludington, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:56, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Text and references copied from James Ludington to William Rath, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:42, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Reference copied from William Rath to Warren Antoine Cartier, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:50, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Web Archiving requested

Would somebody please archive the following link to the web archive wayback mmachine: "The Colorful Murals of Ludington". Advantage Marketing & Publications, Inc. March 16, 2019. Retrieved September 12, 2019. I am not sure, but the publisher may be Advantage Business Media, and they are in bankruptcy. So I worry about the stability of this page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:55, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Gracia 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:49, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Cause of death

Find a Grave says he died from Angina pectoris. Trying to find a WP:RS for that is difficult. Old newspaper obituary? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:36, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

An obituary William Rath, Public Spririted Citizen, is Called to the Beyond Ludington Daily News appears here. I can't read it, however. The second page of the obit is missing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

 Fixed 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Cemetery founder

i know that in general "Find a Grave" is not considered a "reliable source." I know the statement, even as I disagree with it. But here, policy gives way to common sense. Who are you going to believe, the policy or your lying eyes? Rath is the founder of the Cartier Park Cemetery in Ludington. "Cartier Park Memorial cemetery" (Photograph). Retrieved September 15, 2019. William Albert L. Rath at Find a grave 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:56, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

That photograph does not prove that, and even if it did, does not indicate the significance of that claim to the subject. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

It certainly proves that. Res ipsa loquitor He founded it, which indicates its significance. There is no question of his notability. It was another of his many accomplishments. We will have to agree to disagree. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

It proves that there is an arch there with the name Wm Rath. That is not in itself proof that he was the founder of the cemetery, nor that founding a cemetery is a significant accomplishment. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Ah yes. The "name 'Wm Rath'" on that cast iron gateway is adventitious and proves nothing. Your lack of common sense only proves how uncommon it is. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:42, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Ref error

Hello Doug Coldwell or 7&6=thirteen, can you please look at the ref at "His estate was the subject of two lawsuits"? I've tried to fix by adding opening < but it throws a new error I can't work out. Thanks, JennyOz (talk) 20:03, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Fixed.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wasted Time R (talk · contribs) 21:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I have begun reviewing this article. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Neat article, but a few basic facts missing and presentation needs improvement

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Significant issues with duplicate and out-of-order presentation, also some MoS issues, see below

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Some basic facts missing, some additional points could be covered, see below

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Additional images would be good, see below

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Re the infobox and lede:

In terms of a German-American businessman, did Rath become an American citizen at some point? If so, it should just say 'American businessman' in the first sentence, per MOS:ETHNICITY (it can mention his German origin later in the lede if it's important). And it would be good to include when the citizenship was gained in the article body. Or did he stay a German citizen his whole life? That's what the Nationality field of the infobox seems to be saying. In that case, he wasn't German-American, he was just a German expatriot living in America.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

and philanthropist. He was a leader in raising funds for local and charitable causes. Mention of this does not appear anywhere in the article body, unless I missed it, and thus it needs a source.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

'William' sounds like an Anglicized name. Was it originally Wilhelm? In that case it should be included in the lede; also there is a birth name field in the infobox that could be used.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

'Banker' and 'Manufacturer' are occupations but they are usually not titles, which they are listed as in the infobox.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Didn't he die at home in Ludington? Why does the infobox say Mason County?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Re Early life and education:

What was his father's occupation – sounds like it had something to do with construction?

•  Done stonemason --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

If known, it would help to give his father's date of death and the date his mother moved to America – that would help make clearer what happened. The way this reads now, it kind of suggests the two of them separated, which I don't think is the intent.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

What made William decide to leave Germany for the United States? Why did he pick Ludington – was there extended family there already, or a large German immigrant community in the area?

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Re the Business career, Memberships and affiliations, and Personal life sections: The biggest problem with the article is that it's difficult to get a narrative flow of what happened in his life. For example, it's only on my third read-through of it that I realized that he got married less than a month after arriving in Ludginton! What is the story behind that – did they know each other in Germany and both came to America? Or a whirlwind romance? Or an arranged mariage?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

There is a lot of duplication – one section has Rath was the mayor of Ludington for a while. and another section has Rath was the mayor of Ludington from 1910 to 1911. Similarly, the information about his being a collector of customs and a member of the board of trade is presented in two different sections. There is a list of businesses he was involved in, that in most cases duplicates mentions of the same businesses just a couple of paragraphs earlier. And there is chronological confusion – I initially thought the Goldsborough scam ruined him towards the end of his life, but actually that occurred before he founded a bank and before he became mayor. A mention of a battle over his estate is given two sections before he dies. A mention that he was a member of the Republican Party is considered personal, when he was a political official of the town. And so forth.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

So I would take everything in these three sections and combine them into one section and present them in narrative chronological order. That's how a normal biography would be written. I know lots of WP articles have "Personal life" sections but in cases like this I think they are actually harmful. In a small town, everything is connected with everything else. Who you marry, what church you belong to, what town boards you are part of, what political party you affiliate with, what businesses you run, what charities you contribute to ... everything is interrelated and what happens at time T in any of these areas can affect what happens at time T + 1 in any of these other areas.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding some specific items:

When he became mayor, was he elected by the town or selected by a town council? If the former, are there election results available? Did he have any significant accomplishments during his mayoralty?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Manistee Watch Company, Star Watch Case Company – what was his role in thee? They are the two businesses in the list that are not described elsewhere in the text, unless I missed it.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Miss Lucy Rickhoff – the 'Miss' should be dropped.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Around 1890, he suffered a large financial loss after falling victim to a fraudulent copper mining investment scam perpetrated by Mr. Goldsborough. [3][9] – There's a space between the period and the first footnote. Goldsborough needs a first name, not "Mr." Ideally there should be some description of who Goldsborough was and how the experienced Rath managed to get duped. And what was the consequence of this loss? Did Rath lose some of his businesses?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

His estate was the subject of two lawsuits. - lawsuits from whom, and over what, and how were they resolved?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Re the Legacy section: which was 100 blocks south of Ludington Avenue - is this a typo? I looked at an online map and I only counted about 30 blocks in all of Ludington.

•  Done typo --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding images: An image taken for Commons of the Fountain of Youth mural would be good, even if it's in background on an incidental inclusion basis to avoid the rights issues.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

An image taken for Commons of the cemetery entrance or the Rath masoleum would be good and could avoid some of the Find-a-grave dispute (see next).

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

In terms of references:

What is the Cartier entry in the Bibliography for? Is it used in a citation anywhere? And if so, isn't this a normal newspaper article and shouldn't it be handled like all the other newspaper articles, i.e. not be in the Bibliography?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

There's an '[importance?]' tag in Note A that needs to be resolved. That note points to fn 17 which incorporates a Find-a-grave reference, which has previously led to some name-calling between two editors (neither of them you) on the Talk page. The official line is that Find-a-grave usage is limited to the External links section, per WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. In this case I tend to side with allowing this usage in fn 17, but the best course of action would be to find some other source about Rath's involvement in Cartier Memorial Park and use that as the source. And is that name Cartier Memorial Cemetery (Note A) or Cartier Memorial Park (infobox)?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

fn 2 42 –43 has an embedded space.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

fn 6 has a text quote appended to it, which is unnecessary since none of the other citations are doing that, and also confusing since this source is cited six times and presumably only one of those instances is related to the quote.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

fn 18 has a missing period at the end.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

For Category:People from Manistee, Michigan, did he actually live in Manistee, or did he just own property there? If the former, there needs to be something in the article text that supports inclusion in this category. If the latter, the category isn't appropriate.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Why inclusion in Category:People of the Michigan Territory? Both his birth and his coming to the U.S. came after Michigan became a state. Maybe this was a copy-paste leftover from some other article used as a starting point for this one?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I think Category:Businesspeople in timber should be added.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

If it turns out he became an American citizen, Category:19th-century American businesspeople should be added. On the other hand, if he stayed a German citizen, then Category:German expatriates in the United States should be added.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

In sum: Just to be clear, I like this article. I like reading about people like this, people who showed up in some small town and became substantial figures who left a legacy behind. It happened all over America back in that era. And I also realize that you may already be pressed against the limit of what sources are available on this person. If some of the things that I suggested for addition cannot be found, then that's the way it is. But I do think that reorganizing the article along chronological lines would be a significant benefit, regardless of how many additional sources can be located. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:22, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
• @Wasted Time R: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

It definitely looks better now. Some follow-up/further comments:

a German ex-patriot - the word is 'expatriate' (I botched this in my previous comment above). More importantly, did you find a source that explicitly states that he never became an American citizen? From today's perspective, it's odd that he was able to hold office, and be elected mayor, as a foreign national. For instance, I believe that only a few states currently allow green card holders to hold office. Was it less unusual then?

•  Done - I found 2 that say he stayed a German citizen. One from Ludington historian David K Petersen that says, while he is essentially loyal to American institutions and an effective exponent of the American spirit, he finds a just measure of satisfaction in reverting to the great German empire as his fatherland. Another is from Ludington historian author says he was a German immigrant of 1870 and mayor in 1910. In the extensive research I did on him, I never came across anywhere that he became an American citizen.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

If you are linking 'philanthropist' in the lede, you should also link lumber baron and business magnate.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

He was a long-term city council member – this is not stated or sourced in the article body. (I missed this the first time around.) Is this something separate he did or a confusion with his county board of supervisors position?

•  Done - Done both at the same time. While he belonged to the county board of supervisors he ALSO was a member of the Ludington Board of Trade. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Your "Done" responses aren't always clear in cases where no changes were made. Did you determine that 'William' was his original name in Germany, or are there no sources which speak to it one way or the other?

•  Done - no sources which speak to it one way or the other. In a detailed obit it says, William Rath was born in Hamburg, Germany, in 1840. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Why are 'Banker' and 'Manufacturer' appropriately considered as titles?

•  Done - removed from infobox. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is the text quote still in fn 9, when it is cited from multiple places and no other footnotes have text quotes? In other cases I'll just assume that no sources speak to a point raised.

•  Done - removed quote text fn 9. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

He grew up in Hamburg, – this is awkward/redundant where it is – can be moved earlier and combined with Rath attended public schools in Hamburg.

•  Done - moved earlier and combined --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

He then assisted his father as a stonemason. - your response says that his father was a stonemason, but this wording suggests that William was employed as a stonemason which helped his father in some unspecified way. Needs to be reworded for clarity.

•  Done copy edited accordingly. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

perpetrated by Mr. Goldsborough – if sources don't have a first name, this should be changed to "a man named Goldsborough", since the MoS says not to use 'Mr.'

•  Done - "a man named Goldsborough" --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

They also founded – This is potentially confusing, since my eye associated it with the just-above The two formed of Rath and Cartier. Would be safer to write "Rath and Wing also founded ...".

•  Done - "Rath and Wing also founded ..." --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

He was a supporter of the Republican Party – from what you've added, it sounds like he ran for office as a Republican. In which case this should say "He belonged to the ...", which is stronger than 'supporter of'.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

his Democrat opponent - First, there needs to be a link to Democratic Party (United States) here. Second, it might be argued that the Democrat Party (epithet) was not yet active in the 1910s and that some publications used it back then in a non-pejorative way, but why risk annoying half your readership?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

in south beach Epworth Heights – is 'south beach' necessary here? The article on the resort doesn't mention it. If it should stay, maybe "on the south beach at Epworth Heights" would read better?

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

He was the first president the resort's – missing an "of".

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

The William Rath Building, which was in the 100 block – Since this building is still standing, I think this should be stated in present tense.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the photo showing the mural, I think it shows too much of the mural and would be considered a violation of the copyright that is presumably held by Therese Soles. I had in mind something taken from considerably further away, that shows the setting in which the mural appears, but the mural itself is small enough that it does not require permission of the painter. See Commons:De minimis for some examples.

•  Working O.K. I understand. I live walking distance from that mural and will take some pictures today that I believe will be more in mind of what you were thinking of. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done - replaced image with one that is farther away that shows the surrounding setting.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, as I said, definite improvements are being made. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• @Wasted Time R: All further issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

A few items:

Thanks for the explanation of the evidence regarding German citizenship. It's not absolutely definitive, but I agree it's what you need to go with. But you still need to do the spelling correction to 'expatriate'.

I'm still not clear your explanation about the city council. Was that the same as the Ludington Board of Trade? If so, you need to make that clear, since normally those are two different functions. Right now, your first reference to the board is Rath was the president of the Ludington Board of Trade and regularly reported on the freighter traffic in the harbor. That sounds like what a Board of Trade member would do. Then later you have Rath was a member of the Ludington Board of Trade from its beginning.[12] For two years, he was its president. If that's the same board as the previous mention, you should consolidate them. Or is this the city council? Normally a city council is the legislative body for making laws governing all aspects of life in the town, not just economic or trade aspects.

•  Done - consolidated. Will that work? --Doug Coldwell (talk) 08:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

To better keep the image monitors happy, I would suggest changing the caption of the last image to something like "A stretch of N. Rath Avenue in Ludington; the Therese Soles mural of Rath can be seen between two buildings". The idea of Commons:De minimis is that it's not the primary subject of the image.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 08:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I guess I now know which way Mason County leans politically. But if you get enough viewership, someone somewhere will change it down the line ... Wasted Time R (talk) 00:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• @Wasted Time R: All additional issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 08:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm trying to unscramble this. According to fn 3, the Mason County History Companion site that is reprinting the A History of northern Michigan and its people entry, it looks to me like Rath was a member of three separate and distinct entities:

1. "He has been identified with the Ludington Board of Trade during virtually the entire period of its existence and was its president for two years"
2. "For ten years he was a member of the board of aldermen of Ludington"
3. "He ... represented Ludington county as a member of the county board of supervisors"

Assuming no other sources contradict any of this, I think that all three entities should be mentioned in the lede and then all three should be stated and sourced in the article body. This got previously conflated because you had a long-term city council member in the lede, which didn't clearly match anything in the body, and Rath belonged to the Mason county board of supervisors (Board of Aldermen) for ten years in the body, which combined two different positions. I suggest using the 'board of aldermen' term instead of 'city council', just to be consistent with the actual names of the position back then, and say he was on that for ten years, and then separately talk about his membership on the county board of supervisors, which was for an unknown duration. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• @Wasted Time R: Issue addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Looks good, I am passing for GA. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Cabot 2005

Wasted Time R, do you have:

• Cabot, James L. (2005). Ludington: 1830–1930 (Paperback). Images of America. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing. ISBN 0-7385-3951-1.
• Ludington's Carferries: The Rise, Decline & Rebirth of a Great Lakes Fleet. Ludington Daily News. 1997. p. 11. ASIN B000FKPTF6.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:35, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I was able to read the Cabot book at page 43 here (DC also included page 42, but I didn't see anything relevant on it so I took it out), page 68 here, and page 104 here. None of them presented copyvio issues, and these mentions of Rath are incidental to most of the book's contents so I don't think there's a danger of copyvio from other pages. And I was able to read enough of the Carferries volume at a page 11 snippet here to verify that what he wrote was a summary of what the source said and borrowed no language. And Rath is incidental to that work as well, so no greater danger of copyvio. Wasted Time R (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Thx, WTR; I can use the ability to read Cabot on other articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Wm Rath Fountain of Youth.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

William Rath

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Kept per general consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

As part of WP:DCGAR and as the original GA reviewer in 2020, I am placing this article nominated by Doug Coldwell up for GAR in order to keep its status as a GA. During the original review I was involved in looking at some of DC's sources and shaping the focus of the article to give a more chronological treatment. Now prior to this DCGAR process, I have gone through the article again. Regarding copyvio issues, there was nothing egregious but there were a few borderline too-close paraphrasings, which I have now reworded. Regarding text-source correspondence, I've gone back and looked at all of DC's sources. There were some issues that got missed in the original review, but I have corrected them. So at this point, I believe the article corresponds to the GA criteria and its status should be kept.

P.S. The 'Fountain of Youth mural' image is up for deletion at Commons; during the original review, I tried to get DC to retake the photo to be truly de minimis, but alas he didn't quite understand what was needed. So I fear that image is doomed, which is a shame but should not affect the GA status. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

WTF, to XOR'easter's and EEng's great frustration, DC's haphazard citation style (which I have taken to ignoring as it's so awful) has made copyvio checking even more difficult. As long as we're here, it may be worthwhile to get that sorted. I questioned you elsewhere about Cabot, which you had checked, but what about this mess:

• Ludington Daily News 1997, p. 11.

  Ludington's Carferries: The Rise, Decline & Rebirth of a Great Lakes Fleet. Ludington Daily News. 1997. p. 11. ASIN B000FKPTF6.

Were you able to access that, and can anything done to make the citation style more consistent? I realize that may not be part of WIAGA, but what a mess throughout. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

oops !! Well, the F is exactly below the R on the keyboard ... one of my better typos :) Sorry ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that was a great typo ;-) I did also verify the Ludington Carferries content. I have fixed up the cites for inappropriate page numbers in the bibliography and for its 'harv' name being easy to confuse with the newspaper cites. I have also tried to further normalize some of the other cites. Let me know if there is anything else that you see in this regard. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:37, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

As an experienced editor, you can be trusted to get that; no need for me to recheck. By the way, see WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

In this case, I thought the Find-a-grave entry helped illustrate the time and place of the subject, so I left it in. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

PS, for the record, I was stuck with the WTF typo above when Wikipedia went down at 14:00. [1]. Else I would have corrected it :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:46, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The citations were a mess (I believe I've cleaned them up now), and the writing still reeks of DYK word padding; could still use some tightening. Why is this DUE (that is, what secondary sources mention this)?

• His estate was the subject of two lawsuits.[20][21] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I've looked further at these two lawsuits. The first, Ludington State Bank v. Estate of Rath, does have secondary source coverage. But it took place in the 1930s, after Rath's widow died, and became interesting only when a normal probate case involving William Rath's bequeathings upon his wife's death got intertwined with Michigan's new emergency banking act (a forerunner of the national one at the start of the New Deal). It ended up going to the Michigan Supreme Court for a decision. But it really has nothing to do with William Rath in a biographical case. The second, Cartier et al v. Hengstler (or the other order, the final name was a countersuit), has to do with allegations of fraud against Cartier and Rath by someone who felt cut out of a real estate arrangement. It has very little secondary coverage and ended up being dismissed on appeal on grounds of statute of limitations and laches. So while this one does have something to do with Rath biographically, it isn't significant enough to include. So I am removing both of these from the article. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

WTR, the bigger issue is that it's just so hard to understand, particularly after reading through so many sources during the copyvio check, how bits were chosen for inclusion in articles. There are due weight issues and even POV everywhere (it's only in reading the sources for this article did I discover pov at James Ludington). The most random bits of unencyclopedic trivia make it into articles; in that vein, I just couldn't see why those lawsuits were added ... with no context, such insertions render a very odd flow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm done all I can for now; can you find a way to lower the number of paras beginning with Rath? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Have done this. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

EEng do you have a moment to glance over this short article to see if any other absurdities stand out? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

• Removed silly and misinterpreted stuff. EEng 06:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  Some of your reductions/removals I agree with; some I think make the article a little less interesting but will not argue; but some I think removed important biographical points. Those I have attempted to restore, but with completely rewritten text that tries to explain things better. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  I'm all for articles being interesting, but not by stuffing them with pablum like saying someone's success in the lumber business eventually made him a lumber baron, where lumber baron means someone really successful in the lumber business, and anyway redirects to business magnate, which is just another way of saying he was successful, which is where we started. EEng 13:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Noting that a paraphrasing check is still needed, because although it was cited to a different source (Powers), this wording was taken directly from this source. This is a frequent feature of DC's work (text taken from one source but cited to another). It is insufficient to check individual sources relative to the text they cite; everything has to be evaluated versus the entire body of sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:42, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Wasted Time R, SandyGeorgia, and EEng: and @GAR coordinators: where does this stand? Can the GAR be closed? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not willing to close this as keep without either Doug's content being almost entirely excised or indication that extensive checks (and I mean every single source, with Coldwell it's that bad) for copying/close paraphrasing have been completed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Here's the problem (seen in every DC article I've looked at). You can't just check whether individual bits of content are copyvio, because DC frequently took content from one source while citing it to another. You can never be sure from whence came the copyvio; I frequently find it later while checking another source, and that is why his content so often fails verification (he retrofit citations to content taken from different sources). Content has to be written anew. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, I have looked through every piece of text in this article and every source used by this article (fortunately in this case there aren't that many). I have made many changes to the article, including rewriting text, correcting or refining source-text improvement, improving citations, and so on. Two other editors during this post-DC phase have also been active in rewriting or removing material and in improving citations. I believe that all the content is correctly sourced at this point and that there are no copyvio's or close paraphrasings in the current article.

I will also note that what I have done is in accordance with the instructions given by WP:DCGAR FAQ #2 and #3 to the original GA reviewers: "If you believe the GA status might be retained ... you need to be willing to open an independent GAR ... and able to verify all content cited to online and offline sources ... Re-evaluate the content" per the problem areas listed in FAQ #1. That's what I've done, and I believe the current article is free of all of those listed problem areas. If someone points out an issue that remains, I will fix it. But nowhere at WP:DCGAR does it say that an article has to completely replaced with a new article or that content has to be written anew.

If writing a completely new article had been the stated requirement at the start, I would not have signed up for this GAR. So from my perspective it is unfair to suddenly make that the requirement, and if all my efforts disappear under the PDEL/CP hammer, I am going to be one disgruntled Wikipedian. Wasted Time R (talk) 19:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Trainsandotherthings, I have worked with Wasted Time R for over 15 years, and if WTR says the copyvio is removed, I believe he can be trusted. I'm OK with this article, although I don't pretend to understand the GA standards. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I will take a closer look later tonight when I get home. If another coord wishes to close before I do so I won't object. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Having looked at it more closely, I am generally satisfied with the rewording of Doug's former content and I retract my previous statement. I apologize for being overzealous; the computer I was using did not have who wrote that installed and I should have waited until I got home to weigh in, but I didn't want to ignore a ping either. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

My eternal problem; Who Wrote That won't work on iPad, and it's essential with DC work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.