Template:Did you know nominations/Peithessophian Society
- The following discussion 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: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Creator/nominator no longer interesting in pursuing nomination.
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Peithessophian Society
[edit]- ... that a speech delivered on July 20, 1830 by former U.S. Attorney General William Wirt before Rutgers College's Peithessophian Society and its rival Philoclean, foreshadowed the coming Civil War?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ruth A. Parmelee
- Comment: four sources, the Wirt speech itself, Demarest's 1924 History of Rutgers College, McCormick's 1966 Rutgers history, and an inventory of the society's records at the Rutgers University libraries/Special Collections website. The speech was delivered in 1830 per its published form, per Demarest p. 291, per McCormick p.48, (both available on google books snippet view) The mention of "1838" on the Rutgers library inventory source is a typographical error not repeated in other texts.
Created by ColonelHenry (talk). Self nominated at 16:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC).
Article new at time of nomination. Long enough at 1700 characters without the large block of quotes (approximately 300 characters). Hook just under 200 characters. However various inconsistencies and concerns need to be addressed. 1). The speech is dated 20 July 1830 yet the only online source puts the speech date in 1838. 2). The hook is too much of a close paraphrase of that same online source - foreshadow the coming Civil War. 3). the hook fact is not really verifiable. The original online article indicates that the speech appeared to foreshadow the coming Civil War. That qualifier is important. It means that an alternative hook has to be proposed. 4). Further, the entire article needs to be copy-edited for grammar and consistency - eg. "was anstudent literary and debating society founded in 1825 [at the] Rutgers". 5). Most of the article is hinged mainly on one single primary source. The hook is supported by that same reference plus three offline sources. 6). - Perhaps my greatest concern is whether this bit of information is main-page-worthy. That a speech foreshadowed the Civil War is not hook-worthy. In fact many events and speeches, analyzed retrospectively, have been said to foreshadow the Civil War. I recommend a hook with a completely different concept. EagerToddler39 (talk) 02:19, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Waiting a month after nominating this DYK hook to receive a review means I'm no longer interested and because I have my focus on projects elsewhere, I'm not going to waste any time on this article since it likely won't develop beyond what it is at present.--ColonelHenry (talk) 02:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Well I noticed this, and other articles, in the queue for quite a while and decided to help. It would have been good if you had pulled the DYK before someone invested, i.e. wasted quite a bit of time to review it. EagerToddler39 (talk) 03:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- I rather forgot about it until it popped up on my watchlist.--ColonelHenry (talk) 03:26, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Nominator has expressed a lack of further interest in the proposed DYK. I am recommending that it therefore be withdrawn. EagerToddler39 (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Waiting a month after nominating this DYK hook to receive a review means I'm no longer interested and because I have my focus on projects elsewhere, I'm not going to waste any time on this article since it likely won't develop beyond what it is at present.--ColonelHenry (talk) 02:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
