Jump to content

Talk:William S. Clark

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWilliam S. Clark has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 18, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
March 16, 2010Good article nomineeListed
October 9, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
January 20, 2012Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 31, 2019, and July 31, 2022.
Current status: Good article

GA Review

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

Reviewer: 74.38.2.160 (talk) 19:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC) The article is really good. The sources and links all match up. The article is very readable and noteworthy with historical signifigance. My only suggestions are to expand the silver mine controversy, if sources are available. Also, there is speculation that poet Emily Dickinson and William Smith Clark had a relationship. One source states "I propose that Emily Dickinson's Master, the mysterious person she loved when she was about thirty, and for whom she wrote hundreds of poems and the three Master Letters, was William Smith Clark..."[1] Maybe it is all speculation, but worth looking into. {Cmguy777 (talk) 19:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

Thanks very much. I will do some expansion of the mining section. Maki certainly has plenty to say about it. I wish I could find another recent source that talks about his mining company, but I'll see what I can do. On the Emily Dickinson thing, I have really waffled about whether or not to include that. It's intriguing, and has caught a lot of attention, so I can see why it might merit inclusion here. On the other hand, the theory was advanced by just one scholar, doesn't seem to have caught any traction among Dickinson scholars, and her evidence, in my humble opinion, is really, really weak (I've heard her lecture and was dismayed by the vague speculations). When reading WP:weight not long ago, I was reminded that different viewpoints should be represented in proportion to the amount of "weight" (i.e. consensus) that they carry in the scholarly world. And since this theory seems to be a lone voice, I just don't feel like it merits inclusion. Just my two cents. Thanks again. Historical Perspective (talk) 23:25, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The expansion on the later career is really good. The New York Times is a really good source for 19th century news. Clark's financial bankruptcy may have come from a real estate transactions. I believe Maki may have mentioned that one. The Dickinson segment was only a suggestion. You could put in a segment "Alleged Dickinson relationship". The word alleged only implies there is speculation. For example, in George Washington and slavery, there is a segment titled "Alleged slave child". I recommend this as a good article. I am not sure if two or more people have to recommend to get a GA status. {Cmguy777 (talk) 06:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]
I like the idea of the "Alleged Dickinson relationship." I'll try to work that in. I've just finished adding some more narrative to the mining episode. The real estate deals, at least according to Maki, were the source of start-up funds but not so much the demise. That came from the failure of the Starr-Grove mine. I've worked this info into the article. Historical Perspective (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is your decision to put Dickerson in the Article. Clark may have sold mine shares to the Dickerson family. {Cmguy777 (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]


Later career

[edit]

Clark was President, Bothwell was Secretary, and Schuyler Van Rennselaer was the Treasurer.[2] Apparently, it is not very clear why the company financially collapsed. {Cmguy777 (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

I've seen Bothwell referred to as both Secretary and Treasurer in the NY Times. Maybe he was both. Maki consistently refers to him as Treasurer, so I've stuck with that. Van Rennselaer was Treasurer just of the Stormont Mining Company, one of the subsidiaries. Historical Perspective (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The later carreer looks really good. It gives a different perspective to Clark. {Cmguy777 (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

Overview

[edit]

William S. Clark meets wikipedia standards for good article status. There are no edit wars, the sources are valid, and the article is presented in a neutral point of view. {Cmguy777 (talk) 17:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

Statue images

[edit]

While it would be wonderful if we could use the several images of statues of Clark in this article, my understanding is that there are licensing issues with photos of works of art. See the discussion of this in the peer review for this article here. Historical Perspective (talk) 01:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on William S. Clark. 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) 20:04, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_S._Clark&oldid=1206712241"