Talk:Benjamin Franklin/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Exhibitions

Hi Wikipedia - there is an image of bronze sculptures at the National Convention Center on the existing page with no attribution to the sculptor of Ben Franklin (Stuart Williamson). Will an editor please add to the Exhibitions section: The National Constitution Center in Philadelphia which opened July 4, 2003 features Signers’ Hall and its 42 life-size, bronze statues of the Founding Fathers. These statues were created by artists at StudioEIS in Brooklyn and sculptor Stuart Williamson led the team and established the sculptural style for the sculpting of Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and five other signers. --6BravosToros (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason you can't do the edit yourself? but anyway, a couple of thoughts:

1. I think you meant to refer to the National Constitutional Center article.
2. Your text is not completely supported by the cited references. 1)The NY Times ref does not specifically state which signers Williamson was responsible for, just that he "...did the heads of the major figures..." 2) Neither of the two cited refs categorically state that Williamson led the team. The NYTimes ref mentions Ivan Schwartz as also being responsible, the Constitution Center FAQs ref only says that "...were created by artists at Studio EIS in Brooklyn."
3. If you do place some of the content within the article there is no need to Wikilink the article title within the actual article itself.

Shearonink (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate your feedback. For some reason I had no access to edit the page when I looked at it last night so thought for it had been locked from editing. Re: your comment about my suggested text and references, the text from the New York Times article states: "He (Ivan Schwartz) and Stuart Williamson, the portrait sculptor from London who did the heads of the major figures and oversaw the portraits of the other delegates, reviewed all the painted and drawn studies they could find. They also gleaned details about the delegates' faces from family letters of the time. What was most challenging about the Franklin portrait was to achieve the sort of vitality he expressed in everything he did, Mr. Williamson said. He tried to combine the monumental feel of the marble bust by Houdon with the wonderful personality traits expressed by Joseph Siffrede Duplessis in his 1785 portrait of Franklin, which is at the Metropolitan Museum." I will also add this reference: where at page 9 the sculpture model (Mr. Ray Smock) for the Franklin statue talks about the final sitting for the sculpting of the bust by Stuart Williamson. No other sculptor is mentioned nor would there be as the essence of Franklin (i.e., the bust) is entirely Mr. Williamson's art. I do, however, mention in my edit StudioEIS to give credit to all the artists who participated in overall project. Anyway, I again appreciate the feedback and think with the added reference it is reasonably supported that the sculptor of the Franklin bust was Mr. Williamson and I think the NYT statement "did the heads of the major figures and oversaw the portraits of the other delegates" is consistent with the comment "lead the team on the sculpting style." Thanks again --6BravosToros (talk) 05:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

References

Indentured Apprentice

...at 12 he became an apprentice to his brother James, a printer... I don't think "apprentice" adequately covers Benjamin Franklin's situation. In an item in Smithsonian magazine regarding whether many Irish immigrants came here as slaves I found, "A great number of poor Europeans, including the Irish, were brought to the Colonies as indentured servants. Their servitude was limited to a contractually set period of time, but they had no legal rights and were sometimes treated as cruelly as slaves—and sometimes ran away. Even Boston-born Ben Franklin, indentured to his much older brother to learn printing, fled and moved to Philadelphia." [emphasis added] ☺ Dick Kimball (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

No one alleges that young Franklin was mistreated. Rjensen (talk) 16:13, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.physchem.co.za/Static%20Electricity/Charge.htm

✓ Pass: dead link parameter set to "yes"

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-1/p42.html

✗ Fail –  Fixed

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100610204206/http://ris-systech2.its.yale.edu/hondegrees/hondegrees.asp to http://ris-systech2.its.yale.edu/hondegrees/hondegrees.asp

✓ Pass

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090821230120/http://sln.fi.edu:80/franklin/family/lastwill.html to http://sln.fi.edu/franklin/family/lastwill.html

✓ Pass

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090821230120/http://sln.fi.edu:80/franklin/family/lastwill.html to http://sln.fi.edu/franklin/family/lastwill.html

✓ Pass

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 00:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)  Paine Ellsworth  ^u/c 14:40, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

a citation needs to be removed

It's currently cit#2 - "Inventor". The Franklin Institute. Retrieved April 25, 2012. The page no longer exists. -edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:300:8DA5:A505:9D08:34BA:8575 (talk) 05:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed with archived URL (did not need to be removed)  Paine Ellsworth  ^u/c 14:54, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Redirect Clean Up

It would be cleaner to redirect "The Busybody" queries to the new "The Busy-Body" page, not to the main Franklin page. Could someone with more access than me please address this? Eanhello (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

About Ancestry Sections

Am I the only one confused about having two sections for Ancestry? Both the first and the last of the table of contents... Please clarify. Mangoctiy (talk), Feb. 16/2017 —Preceding undated comment added 22:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I came to the talk article wondering the same. They appear the same, (apart from the popout ancestry table), and I suspect results from an editing error. I propose to delete the second, but it may be worth trawling back through the article history. Mattymmoo (talk) 23:45, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I did the trawl, looking for changes of approx 3200 characters, the length of the ancestry section, and traced the change to an uncommented addition of the entire section to near the beginning of the article:

(cur | prev) 16:56, 17 November 2016‎ Bergeronp (talk | contribs)‎ . . (167,391 bytes) (+3,213)‎ . . (undo | thank)

I will proceed in due course with deleting the second copy, but move the ancestry popout. Mattymmoo (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://fi.edu/franklin/inventor/inventor.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060427070508/http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/massacre.htm to http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/massacre.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120326074021/http://www.unitarian.org.uk/support/doc-EssexHall1.shtml to http://www.unitarian.org.uk/support/doc-EssexHall1.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120502102128/http://www.english.udel.edu/lemay/franklin/ to http://www.english.udel.edu/lemay/franklin/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://sln.fi.edu/franklin/family/lastwill.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 14:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110128075748/http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/letter1.htm to http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/letter1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905094326/http://ushistory.org/franklin/autobiography/singlehtml.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/franklin/autobiography/singlehtml.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060214030435/http://www.yale.edu/franklinpapers/index.html to http://www.yale.edu/franklinpapers/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070102184849/http://literalsystems.org/abooks/index.php/Audio-Book/DialogueBetweenFranklinAndTheGout to http://literalsystems.org/abooks/index.php/Audio-Book/DialogueBetweenFranklinAndTheGout
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905094326/http://ushistory.org/franklin/autobiography/singlehtml.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/franklin/autobiography/singlehtml.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 03:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060103051246/http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/pa-1773.htm to http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf3/pa-1773.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090528094815/http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf1/m7.htm to http://www.historycarper.com/resources/twobf1/m7.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116152516/http://www.coopheroes.coop/inductees/franklin.html to http://www.coopheroes.coop/inductees/franklin.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Changing the portrait of Benjamin Franklin?

Recently, a new portrait of Benjamin Franklin was added to the lead infobox, but it appears to have not been formatted properly (there are white borders on either side of the image), which has messed with the aspect ratio of the image as it appears in the infobox (it now appears "compressed" horizontally). I don't see any discussions regarding this image change in the history of this talk page (or at least, I don't see any that appear to have been made soon before the new image was added). Does anyone think this image should be changed (either by cropping it, or by replacing it with the old image as it had previously appeared)? Name goes here (talk | contribs) 23:29, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Update: for some reason, the picture appears to be formatted normally now (in that it is no longer "compressed" horizontally). Therefore, perhaps this discussion is unnecessary now (unless it is still causing formatting errors for others, or if the other users prefer the old image anyway). Name goes here (talk | contribs) 01:49, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081002000344/http://www.oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/library/readings/gulf/gulf.html to http://www.oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/library/readings/gulf/gulf.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120714094231/http://booking-help.org/book_338_glava_314_Edict_of_Versailles_(1787).html to http://booking-help.org/book_338_glava_314_Edict_of_Versailles_%281787%29.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 19:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benjamin Franklin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131102055511/http://history.state.gov/milestones/1776-1783/BFranklin to https://history.state.gov/milestones/1776-1783/BFranklin

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Embassy to Canada

I did not notice mention of his embassy to Canada in early 1776 with Samuel Chase and Charles Carroll of Carrollton. Mannanan51 (talk) 04:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2018

Change birth date from January 17th to January 6th. He was christened on the 17th but born on the 6th. FamilySearch.org will link you to several records of his birth on the 6th. Jntrcs (talk) 17:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2018

Change birth date from January 17th to January 6th. He was christened on the 17th but born on the 6th. FamilySearch.org will link you to several records of his birth on the 6th. Jntrcs (talk) 17:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Lede shows the difference between old style and new style dates. No change needed. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

SOV is correct (naturally). Explanations can be found at Old Style and New Style dates, as well as this article's note at Benjamin_Franklin#cite_note-calendar_group=Note-11. - SummerPhD^v2.0 17:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Is the autograph in Wikipedia valid?

Why does the autograph currently shown spell his last name with an "e" near the end instead of an "i"? (Franklen versus Franklin) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.72.70 (talk) 12:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Wave Theory of Light Also Held by Malebranche

The statements about Huygens' wave theory of light and only Franklin and Euler agreeing needs to be corrected, as Nicolas Malebranche also came to agree to the wave theory and revoke his earlier occasionalism in a later essay among the Éclaircissements, Elucidations, or Search for Truth (the complete 1721 edition). A published reference noting this fact and the failure of historians on this point can be found in my 2005 article Foundations of Science (2005) vol. 10, p. 153-245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-004-3068-9 hgwb 08:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC) hgwb 18:41, 1 March 2018 (UTC) hgwb 18:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

confusing section concerning 'news sheets'

Currently reads: When Franklin established himself in Philadelphia, shortly before 1730, the town boasted two "wretched little"[citation needed] news sheets, Andrew Bradford's "The American Weekly Mercury," and Samuel Keimer's longly titled "Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences, and Pennsylvania Gazette." This instruction in all arts and sciences consisted of weekly extracts from Chambers's Universal Dictionary. Franklin quickly did away with all this when he took over the Instructor and made it The Pennsylvania Gazette.

It says there were two, but appears at a glance to list three (1. American Weekly Mercury; 2. Universal Instructor; 3. Pennsylvania Gazette). Seems confusing. Was the second news sheet "Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences, and Pennsylvania Gazette" or just "Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences"? It's confusing.

Did Franklin turn "Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences, and Pennsylvania Gazette" or "Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences" into "Pennsylvania Gazette"? I am hoping someone knows the answer. AAABBB222 (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

The second news sheet mentioned was indeed the 'Universal Instructor in all Arts and Sciences, and Pennsylvania Gazette' as indicated by the fact that the word 'and' appearing after the comma is in italic. Also, see Library of Congress https://www.loc.gov/item/sn84026369/ Carlroddam (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Re: "Newspaperman"

Parts of this section read more like an exercise in prose than a Wikipedia article, and barely cite any sources. It should be thoroughly reviewed for bias, possibly completely rewritten in some parts. For example:

"The Pennsylvania Gazette, like most other newspapers of the period, was often poorly printed. Franklin was busy with a hundred matters (???) outside of his printing office, and never seriously attempted to raise the mechanical standards of his trade."

At least this part very clearly needs redoing. PerhapsXarb (talk) 08:51, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

somehow the source got lost--it's from Cook, Colonial and Revolutionary Literature; Early National Literature, Part I. Colonial Newspapers and Magazines, 1704–1775 (1917) online here Rjensen (talk) 10:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Met Mozart?

Is there any evidence that Mozart met Franklin? None that I'm aware of.

Their visits to Paris barely overlap. There are no letter by either or their circle commenting on such a thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:777C:C750:3A:D638:B670:E5ED (talk) 14:55, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

This claim has been added repeatedly by Logan Fruchtman. I have previously removed the claim twice as unsourced and placed warnings on their talk page. Two other editors have removed it as well. They don't seem to be hearing. (They also seem to be adding a lot of other unsourced claims of connections between the U.S./colonies and 18th century European music, most of which had been reverted previously.) I'm removing it again and warning them again. Let's see if they start to respond. (Had the other editors warned them, this likely would have been resolved one way or another by now.)- SummerPhD^v2.0 19:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

After a series of warnings, they have now been indefinitely blocked. We should be done with this one, but keep an eye open for socks. - SummerPhD^v2.0 14:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2018

It should mention all his inventions every single one and don't try to make him a saint be honest on who he really was use he autobiography for the facts his views on himself NerfbastianPLZ (talk) 23:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 00:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Franklin in England

Did Franklin have any legal authority or legal recognition by Parliament while he was in Britain representing Pennsylvania ? Cmguy777 (talk) 01:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Do you mean his 1757 trip at the behest of the Pennsylvania Assembly or his 1764 trip, sent by the anti-proprietary party? If nothing else, his testimony to the House of Commons on the second trip is well-documented and covered here. - SummerPhD^v2.0 07:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Excessive list of Activities in Lede

"Franklin was a leading author, printer, political theorist, politician, freemason, postmaster, scientist, inventor, humorist, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat."

He was a leading postmaster?

More importantly, political theorist, politician, civic activist, statesman and diplomat are heavily overlapping with one another. At the moment it seems like a fangirl follower from Frankin's Instagram is the main author of this article. 91.10.32.159 (talk) 01:06, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Please read the article. He was indeed a leading postmaster, and all of those other things besides. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:17, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

In the death section it should read lie on his side rather than lay

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.9.53.23 (talk • contribs) 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Disagree. Past simple tense: Last night, I lay on my bed and wept. (from: Oxford Dictionaries Blog.) Shearonink (talk) 01:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Date of birth

This article lists both 1706 and 1705 as his year of birth. Which is right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbf (talk • contribs) 04:43, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Both. It depends on whether you use the Gregorian or Julian calendar. I recommend the article on these calendars. The Catholic Church changed the calendar because the Old Style calendar had become inaccurate. Protestant nations, like the English, were slow to adopt the New Style. Consequently, many of America's Founding Fathers - including Franklin and Washington - were born when the Old Style was in effect. This can result in their being born in an earlier year only to have the recognition of the calendar change bump their birthdate forward. Mnfowler (talk) 15:04, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Musical Endeavors Section Error

In the Musical Endeavors section, the text incorrectly refers to Franklin's invention, the Glass Armonica, as "Glass Harmonica." These terms were disambiguated earlier in the article under the Inventions section. This should be corrected. Cedarleaf (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

3.3 Freemasonry Benjamin Franklin...was the Worshipful Master of a Grand Orient of France Lodge in Paris.

Section 3.3 Freemasonry should also include the fact that Benjamin Franklin also served as the the Worshipful Master of a Grand Orient of France:

"...It is indeed a great privilege to have the opportunity to open more widely the doors of understanding. So let us attempt in our time together to overcome the friction of difference that far too often marks the realities of the profane world, and tarnishes our Masonic world.

The Masonic Order has endured through the vicissitudes of time, culture, civilizations and society. However, it has survived through the centuries not by following passively the movements of society, but rather it often has been at the forefront of important change within society. In those moments of leadership it has been at its strongest.

As one important illustration, simply being here in the United States of America, brings to mind the major role American Masons, and some of their French Brethren, played in establishing modern democratic society.

We can all give our deepest thanks to George Washington, Benjamin Franklin (Who I can tell you with great pride was the Worshipful Master of a Grand Orient of France Lodge in Paris.), to the Marquis de Lafayette, and to many others who worked so strenuously for freedom that time will not permit us to list all of their names today.

In point of fact, there have been important and fruitful moments of deep contact between French and American Masons going back even before the time of the American Revolution. Nevertheless, we know from history and personal experience, that there are different traditions in America and France. Because French Masons realize fairly well how difficult it is for some of our Brethren on this side of the Atlantic to understand how it came to pass in France that there is such a great variety of Masonic bodies and Masonic streams, or traditions, it would be of value to discuss France to some degree."

The Great Divide: The Grand Orient of France and Dogmatic Freemasonry ADDRESS TO THE 2002 CALIFORNIA MASONIC SYMPOSIUM By Alain Bauer, Grand Master of the Grand Orient of France Sacramento, California, July 27th, 2002 --Bee Cliff River Slob (talk) 15:54, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

The Scalping Letter

I don't see any reference in the article to Franklin's "hoax" publication of A Supplement to the Boston Independent Chronicle, dated from Boston, March 12 (1782) but actually written in its entirety and printed by Franklin at Passy in France. The full text of the publication is available here.

I think it merits some inclusion, perhaps in the Legacy section of the article. The hoax newspaper was printed as part of Franklin's efforts to bring pressure on the British Ministry through fostering disgust among the British population at the excesses of the British forces in America. In particular, it focused on the use of Native Americans by the British to attack military and civilian targets.

The single sheet newspaper contains on the front page a supposed copy of a letter captured by the New England Militia from an agent in British service, James Craufurd, enclosing scalps taken by the Seneca which were being sent as a present to the Governor of Canada. These were said to include: 43 scalps of "Congress soldiers", 62 of "Farmers", 88 scalps from women, 193 from boys, 211 from girls, and 29 from infants “ripped out of their mothers’ bellies.”

I'd suggest inclusion here because the entirely false newspaper article subsequently took on a life of its own. It was reprinted (as a true account actual events) at least thirty times in North American newspapers before 1854, when it was finally identified as a hoax. The appendix to this paper lists them - as I am not sure if that link will work, that is Franklin's own Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol 154 No 2, December 2008. And even as late as 1992 Allan W Eckert's biography of Tecumseh treated the so-called Scalping Letter as if it were correct reportage.

This "gruesome propaganda" created by Franklin can only have contributed to the hostility towards Native Americans in the 19th Century, and of course subsequently, though no doubt more indirectly. One recent book compares it to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - Gregory Evans Dowd's 2016 "Groundless", chapter 9. The chapter is largely reproduced here. This may be going a bit far, though it is easy to see the parallels.

I'd be interested in others' views before I add anything to this already lengthy article. Thomas Peardew (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

"lay" to "lie"

There's a brief exchange in the Archive where a user asks that "lay" in the Death section be corrected to "lie", and someone else incorrectly states that "lay" is correct since it's the simple past tense of "lie". The verb is in fact in the present subjunctive ("she suggested that he ... lie on his side"), and the present subjunctive of to lie is "lie", so I'm changing it. Binabik80 (talk) 22:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Fact mentioned twice.

The fact that he was awarded an honorary doctorate by U of St. Andrews is mentioned twice (and the fact that because of that, he was refered to as Dr. Franklin)Naraht (talk) 14:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Fact mentioned twice.

The fact that he was awarded an honorary doctorate by U of St. Andrews is mentioned twice (and the fact that because of that, he was refered to as Dr. Franklin)Naraht (talk) 14:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Franklin's lightning rod

The statement that Franklin developed his lightning rod AFTER he flew his kit I believe is in error. He and some French scientists or natural philosophers, as they called themselves, had been discussing lightning rods before the kite. Experiments were done, proving th erog works. So many French then put up lightning rods on their homes since this of course did wonders to prevent fires started by lightning. bob Lacy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.140.27.158 (talk) 07:17, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Link change

Consider changing

He was also awarded an honorary doctorate by Oxford University in 1762.

to

He was also awarded an honorary doctorate by University of Oxford in 1762.

correct the name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.213.86.231 (talk • contribs) 08:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2020

Please change: "Franklin owned as many as seven slaves, two males who worked in his household and his shop." to the following: As early as 1735, Franklin purchased his first slave, Joseph, as a boy. By 1750, Franklin purchased a slave couple, Jemima and Peter. Franklin purchased another slave boy around 1756. Around the same time, Franklin purchased a slave named King as a gift for his son, William. Historian Gary Nash says "King was the slave who famously fled to find refuge outside London with a kindly woman who prepared him for a life of literacy and Christian commitment." Franklin also purchased Othello, another young boy, to help his wife Deborah around the house when Franklin left for London in 1757. There is speculation to whether or not Othello was the son of Franklin's female slave, Jemima. Franklin later acquired George in 1763 after returning to Philadelphia and gifted him to his daughter, Sally, and her husband as a wedding gift. Bob, the last slave Franklin acquired, was purchased by his wife while Franklin was in England. He was also later gifted to Sally and her husband after Franklin returned to Philadelphia in 1775. Historycrumudgeon (talk) 17:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done: While I AGF on the following, the names and biographical details of the involved persons do not seem strictly required for an encyclopedic coverage of the topic. I have added the citation as a "for more details, see..." I am also unsure whether the American Philosophical Society specializes in history or not... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

References

The hypocrisy of Somerset v Stewart

Benjamin Franklin believed Somerset's case to be hypocrisy, and vocalized his beliefs.[1]

It is said that some generous humane persons subscribed to the expence of obtaining liberty by law for Somerset the Negro.2 It is to be wished that the same humanity may extend itself among numbers; if not to the procuring liberty for those that remain in our Colonies, at least to obtain a law for abolishing the African commerce in Slaves, and declaring the children of present Slaves free after they become of age. By a late computation made in America, it appears that there are now eight hundred and fifty thousand Negroes in the English Islands and Colonies; and that the yearly importation is about one hundred thousand, of which number about one third perish by the gaol distemper on the passage, and in the sickness called the seasoning before they are set to labour. The remnant makes up the deficiencies continually occurring among the main body of those unhappy people, through the distempers occasioned by excessive labour, bad nourishment, uncomfortable accommodation, and broken spirits.3 Can sweetening our tea, &c. with sugar, be a circumstance of such absolute necessity? Can the petty pleasure thence arising to the taste, compensate for so much misery produced among our fellow creatures, and such a constant butchery of the human species by this pestilential detestable traffic in the bodies and souls of men? Pharisaical Britain! to pride thyself in setting free a single Slave that happens to land on thy coasts, while thy Merchants in all thy ports are encouraged by thy laws to continue a commerce whereby so many hundreds of thousands are dragged into a slavery that can scarce be said to end with their lives, since it is entailed on their posterity!

The point Franklin is making is that the British Empire forced slavery on most if not all of its colonial possessions, but came out smelling like a rose by abolishing slavery at home. And only at home. Progressingamerica (talk) 01:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

King - misleading descriptions of treatment re abolition tendencies

Suggestion: Change "and King left his service there in 1756: by 1758 he was working for a household in Suffolk." King absconded .......suffolk.....and two slave runaway adverts were placed for the attempt to reclaim King in 1862.

Source: "King, however, was a different proposition. Within a year of their arrival in London he took advantage of William and Benjamin’s absence to run away from their lodgings on Craven Street. In a letter to his wife Deborah, Benjamin would later report that King ‘was soon found in Suffolk, where he had been taken into the Service of a Lady that was very fond of the Merit of making him a Christian, and contributing to his Education and Improvement’. Noting that King had been ‘of little Use, and often in Mischief’, Benjamin reported to Deborah that William had ‘consented to her [the unnamed woman in Suffolk] keeping him while we stay in England’.

But when it occurred to him that King’s new custodian might ‘persuade Billy to sell him to her’,

Benjamin made it clear that his son continued to claim ownership of the young enslaved boy. At some point between 1760 and early 1762, King left his new mistress and returned to London: perhaps she had died or had tired of her new charge; King may have again escaped, or perhaps William had reclaimed him. But if William had done so, it was not for long, for on 16 February 1762 he published an advertisement in the Public Advertiser, describing King and offering a two-guinea reward for his capture and return.

Prof Newman cites The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, IX: January 1, 1760 through December 31, 1761, ed. L.W. Labaree et al. (New Haven, CT, 1966), pp. 174–5 (Benjamin Franklin to Deborah Franklin, London, 27 June 1760). English Historical Review Vol. CXXXIV No. 570 Advance Access publication Oxford University Press 2019 Prof Simon Newman: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyhunterteach (talk • contribs) 14:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2020

I'd like to add that he was also a slaveholder not just a founding father Jcs314 (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Also see Benjamin Franklin#Slavery. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Memoirs

Probably worth mentioning (and drawing from) his posthumously published memoirs:

• Franklin, Benjamin (1790). Memoirs of the Late Dr. Benjamin Franklin: With a review of his pamphlet, entitled "Information to those who would wish to remove to America". London: A. Grant – via Google Books.

I have not been able yet to track down who the editor was and who (if not the same person) wrote the running biography in it (the smaller-print material on the left-hand pages).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

What's Benjamin Franklin's Birthday?

The reference to https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2006/01/what-s-benjamin-franklin-s-birthday.html is mistaken and adds nothing of value. The following slate.com passage is wrong: “That suggests he was born on Jan. 6, 1706, an old-style date that translates to the Gregorian Jan. 17, 1707 [no; that translates to the Gregorian Jan. 17, 1706]. But according to documents from Boston’s city registrar, he actually came into the world on the old-style Jan. 6, 1705 [again, no; he, actually, came into the world on the old-style Jan. 6, 1706]”. Please, check the dates carefully.Shams lnm (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

@Srich32977: In brief: The slate.com article contains mistaken and inaccurate information. This slate.com endnote should have been removed from Wikipedia a long time ago.Shams lnm (talk) 22:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shams lnm: I still don't understand. Old Style and New Style dates says that the new year started on March 25 in England and the colonies, which would mean January 17, 1706 N.S. would correspond to January 6, 1705 O.S. It also says that sometimes dual dating was used to make it January 6. 1705/06. I can't tell if the Slate article is claiming he was born {Jan.6, 1705 OS and Jan.17, 1706 NS}, or on {Jan.6, 1706 OS and Jan.17, 1707 NS}. Does old style refer to the calendar in place at the time (Julian calendar with the new year starting with March 25) or the Roman Julian calendar with the new year starting on January 1? Something that confuses me is the inconsistent dating across multiple articles. The article about James Madison says he was born March 16, 1751 N.S. and March 5, 1750 O.S. (which would be correct if March 25 was the start of the year for O.S. dates in England and the colonies). The article on George Washington says he was born February 22, 1732 (which is new style) and that his birth was recorded as February 11, 1731 (however, it does not describe that date as "old style"). The article about Isaac Newton uses dual dating for his date of death: March 20, 1726/27 (March 31, 1727 N.S.). Nine hundred ninety-nine (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, I just checked Template:OldStyleDate and it even used Benjamin Franklin's birthday as an example: 17 January 1706 [O.S. 6 January 1705]. I also checked Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Julian_and_Gregorian_calendars but it does not clarify it for me. It says when both old and new style dates should be mentioned, to consider using the template, but it does not say if the old style refers to the day/month of the calendar used at the time (Julian instead of Gregorian), or to the year in use at the time (the year starting on March 25 instead of January 1). It also says that a new style date can refer to either the Gregorian calendar or a start of year adjustment (which to me seems to confuse things; I think it should refer to the Gregorian date to be consistent). It says January 1 should be used as the start of the year for Julian dates, but it is not clear if that is when simply using a Julian date as the date of a historical event, or to indicate the difference between new and old style dates. When both new style and old style are used together, it sounds like the purpose is to indicate both the Gregorian date and the date used at the time and place. Nine hundred ninety-nine (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nine hundred ninety-nine: You raised some thought-provoking points. Thank you. As far as B. Franklin is concerned, I now think I got it wrong. According to Carla Mulford, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Benjamin Franklin, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, p. xiv + Alan Houston, ed., Franklin: The Autobiography and other Writings on Politics, Economics, and Virtue, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2004, p. xxxix, he was born on January 17th, 1706 (January 6th, 1705, Old Style). However, according to Charles W. Eliot, ed., The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, The Pennsylvania State University, Hazleton, PA, 2007, p. 3, he was born on January 6th, 1706 [Old Style]. Same thing with the online edition of Encyclopædia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Benjamin-Franklin. I suspect that in B. Franklin’s case the O.S. refers to the year in use at the time; that is: the year starting on March 25th instead of January 1st.Shams lnm (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nine hundred ninety-nine: January 6th, 1706 [Old Style] Bud Hannings, American Revolutionary War Leaders: A Biographical Dictionary, McFarland & Company, Jefferson, NC, 2009, p. 119.Shams lnm (talk) 01:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nine hundred ninety-nine: Sunday, January 6th, 1706 [Old Style] Willard Sterne Randall, Nancy Nahra, Benjamin Franklin: Daring the Lightning, New Word City, [w.p.], 2014, p. 3 [e.p.].Shams lnm (talk) 02:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nine hundred ninety-nine: 6th January 1706 [Old Style] Harold E. Selesky, ed., Encyclopedia of the American Revolution, Charles Scribner’s Sons, Detroit, MI, 2006, p. 386.Shams lnm (talk) 02:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

His birthday is rendered as January 17, 1706/New Style (modern calendar)/January 6, 1705 (Old-Style) per the following:

• The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin by Gordon S. Wood explains the birthdate as such on Page 17:

Franklin was born in Boston on January 17, 1706 (January 6, 1705 in the old style calendar)

• The Cambridge Companion to Benjamin Franklin edited by Carla Mulford states the birthdate as

1706 Born January 17 (January 6, 1705, Old Style)

• The Portable Benjamin Franklin by Benjamin Franklin and edited by Larzer Ziff, published by Penguin Press, states the birthdate in "The Editor's Notes" as

In 1752 England adopted the New Style (or Georgian) calendar in which the new year commenced on January 1st. Previously, the new year had begun on March 25th. The change necessitated the dropping of eleven days. Hence, for example, Franklin's birth date was January 6, 1705, Old Style, and is January 17, 1706, New Style.

Any source that states the Old Style date as being January 6 1706 is simply wrong. Gordon S. Wood, the Cambridge University Press & its publication, and the Penguin Press's version of the Old Style date as being 1705 is correct. The errant sources seem to be forgetting that (in addition to the moving forward of eleven days) that the year was advanced one year - for dates between January 1 and March 25. Shearonink (talk) 07:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I went ahead and corrected the Old Style year from 1706 to 1705. I will source that change appropriately in the article sometime tomorrow - time to call it a night. Some of the footnotes/references need to be adjusted as well. Shearonink (talk) 07:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Shearonink: You did well and acted correctly in going ahead and reversing the Old Style year from 1706 to 1705. It’s true that "The errant sources seem to be forgetting that (in addition to the moving forward of eleven days) the year was advanced one year - for dates between January 1 and March 25".Shams lnm (talk) 11:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin was born in January 17 ,1706 this conversation is over. -Naomi ;) P.S. : Why Be So Complicated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.127.50.73 (talk) 19:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Keep scholarly studies

Ralph Frasca has published a major university press book on Franklin, and a number of scholarly essays in major peer-reviewed journals. His work has been very widely praised in reviews and has been cited in dozens of scholarly studies. Journal editors call on him to review major books, That is exactly the sort of high profile mainstream scholarship in reliable sources that Wikipedia editors depend upon, so I restored the section on his findings. see https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C27&q=ralph+frasca+franklin&btnG= Rjensen (talk) 05:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2021

Add https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/benjamin-franklin-estranged-wife-nearly-two-decades-180964400/ as citation for missing citation at.

Deborah Read Franklin died of a stroke in 1774, while Franklin was on an extended mission to Great Britain; he returned in 1775.[citation needed] Jimhanas (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

NY Post

My addition to places named after Benjamin was reverted simply due to the fact that “NY Post” isn’t a credible source. I find that one-sided & politically charged. I find this revert unethical. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Elvisisalive95, you've been cautioned about casting aspersions so please stop. Read WP:RSPS; we do not use New York Post as a source on Wikipedia. Schazjmd (talk) 23:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I then added a Fox News article which is completely accepted by Wikipedia as a credible source for news like this & it was again reverted. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 23:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

It was not reverted, I reworded it; I had already found my own source. Schazjmd (talk) 23:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much ! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 00:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Life about Benjamin Franklin

Ben Franklin was born on 17th Jan 1706. He was born in Boston and had quite a tough life over there. He had 16 brothers and sisters and he was the youngest amongst them all. Ben was forced to leave school at the age of 10 in order to work with his dad! A few years later he had become a printers apprentice for his brother James. Ben's most favourite hobby was to read. Reading helped him to gain knowledge. He ran away from his home town (Boston) When he was 17 which broke his apprenticeship with his brother. He went to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where he worked as a printer. In 1729, Franklin became the publisher of a newspaper called the Pennsylvania Gazette. In 1732, Franklin first published Poor Richard's Almanack. Poor Richard's Almanack was a yearly pamphlet that Franklin wrote under the pseudonym (fake name) of "Richard Saunders", also known as "Poor Richard." In 1778, France allied with the colonies in their fight against England. The alliance with France would prove to be one of the most important factors in the American victory. Franklin remained in France throughout the war. In 1783, he helped to negotiate an end to the Revolutionary War with the Treaty of Paris. After that Ben started inventing things. For example:- Benz invented the spark plug so that his engine would be able to effectively work. Franklin later 58.182.176.11 (talk) 07:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)died in Philadelphia on April 17, 1790.

The purpose of the Talk page is for discussion to improve the article. How does this do that? American In Brazil (talk) 22:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Help!

Under 'Further Reading' can someone tighten up the space below Gaustad. I tried but was unable to do it. Thanks for your help. American In Brazil (talk) 15:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Citations needed supplied

Under "Musical Endeavours" - "Franklin is known to have played the violin, the harp, and the guitar.[citation needed] He also composed music, notably a string quartet in early classical style.[citation needed]". The link provided below gives ample references to Franklin's Opus 1 and his String Quartet, along with his modest competence with the violin harp and guitar, and much else besides, including his musical associations in France for example.

https://iml.esm.rochester.edu/polyphonic-archive/article/benjamin-franklin-the-composer/ Ad scribendum (talk) 15:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Ad scribendum, I've added the reference to the article. Schazjmd (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2021

Include coat of arms in infobox, like in Theodore Roosevelt's article 86.129.44.80 (talk) 18:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Please provide a copyright free image of his coat of arms. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Coat of Arms: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Coat_of_Arms_of_Benjamin_Franklin.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.44.80 (talk) 16:17, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2021

Benjamin Franklin was a world wind inventor who new how to do stufe and when to do it he made the following inventions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.250.49.66 (talk) 18:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2021

hi, i like thge dsussn do uyou ? im tooo imnn d[prestin ikkm im in 1 grad3e ji i like girl\ 2601:88:8100:3A0:385F:75E6:82B3:27D8 (talk) 14:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Run n Fly (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Franklin on immigration

Should something be mentioned in the article regarding Franklin's stance on immigration? I've been reading that he had a bias against German immigrants, but also was in support of immigration. If so, I'm not sure exactly where to add it.

• https://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/fear-immigrants-america/story?id=19177944
• https://qz.com/904933/a-history-of-american-anti-immigrant-bias-starting-with-benjamin-franklins-hatred-of-the-germans/
• https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1161&context=surc
• https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-peter-collinson/
• http://blog.yalebooks.com/2017/04/12/benjamin-franklin-on-immigration/

Ckoerner (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

rcCOREYY

TURKISH SHROUD IN PUBG MOBILE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.95.198.82 (talk) 12:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2021

This edit request is intended to better clarify the relationship between Benjamin Franklin and his son, William.

Please insert my edits at the end of Paragraph 3, in the William Franklin section of the Benjamin Franklin article.

William, even later in his life, attempted to make amends with his estranged father. In The Jefferson Monticello, Kathryn Braun writes that William, throughout his life, attempted to reconcile with his father, to no avail. William even wrote to his father, explaining why he felt he had to remain loyal to the King, since he had been appointed by the King to be governor of New Jersey, but his father would have none of it, stating that the Revolution was everything for which he and his good name stood.

Works Cited Braun, Kathryn. "Divided Loyalties: Benjamin and William Franklin." Thomas Jefferson's Monticello, www.monticello.org/research-education/blog/divided-loyalties-benjamin-and-william-franklin/. Accessed 20 May 2021. Peregrinepassage (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Extra capital in lede

In last part, it says "American Society," rather than "American society."

2601:600:A37F:F111:DDA2:4E66:D527:9A53 (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2021

Under the section "Public Life" change "Visits to Europe" to "Visits to Continental Europe." Reason: Great Britain and Ireland were viewed as part of Europe. 2605:8D80:525:5FA:F1B3:410B:A547:A886 (talk) 14:26, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I don't think the precision is required. In any case, the article already clearly states where he went to, doesn't it?, so no clarification required. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Diplomatic rank while in France. Franklin was the first diplomatic representative of the US to France. That’s true. But he was given the rank of only Minister in compliance with the prevailing diplomatic practices of the time. The US was not considered to be great enough a nation to have its own “ambassador”.

Franklin's relationship with slavery.

In the Slavery section, it says:

"Franklin tended to take both sides of the issue of slavery, never fully divesting himself from the institution."

then goes on to say:

"Benjamin Franklin thought that slavery was "an atrocious debasement of human nature" and "a source of serious evils." He and Benjamin Rush founded the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery in 1774.

In his later years, as Congress was forced to deal with the issue of slavery, Franklin wrote several essays that stressed the importance of the abolition of slavery and of the integration of blacks into American society."

So, which is it? That Franklin never fully gave up on slavery or that he did and went on to become an advocate for the abolitionist movement?

You have confused me! Please clarify. Thank you for your time, 75.127.239.154 (talk) 21:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Declaration of Independence

please change ((Declaration of Independence)) to ((United States Declaration of Independence|Declaration of Independence)) twice 2601:541:4580:8500:2D10:94AB:5379:280D (talk) 13:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done SchreiberBike | ⌨  15:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Franklin's Capacitor

This note is for documentation. Per discussion in the articles History of the Battery and Electrochemical Battery, franklins capacitor experiment has been deleted from those articles. His use of the word "battery" is unremarkable. Unfortunately, the reference to Franklin's papers where he supposedly uses the term "electrical battery" isn't available, nor is the National Geographic article "What You Don't Know About Batteries". So it isn't possible to assess whether the mention of "electrical battery" should be retained. However, there is already a parenthetical statement that it is nothing to do with Volta's pile, I have chosen to simply add the phrase that Franklins capacitor was not a true battery, the terminology used in other articles. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 18:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

• This is not my area of expertise but it is my understanding that what he worked with is best described as a Leyden jar, though capacitor is a good enough later term to apply to that. Protonk (talk) 19:08, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Franklin's position on slavery: "never fully divested himself"?

Under the heading "Slavery", the second paragraph makes these claims: "Franklin, however, refused to publicly debate the issue of slavery at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. Franklin tended to take both sides of the issue of slavery, never fully divesting himself from the institution." (emphases mine) These claims are demonstrably false, and rest upon a manipulation of language. Franklin "refused" to publicly debate slavery in 1787; Franklin "never fully divested himself", etc.
Regarding the 1787 Constitutional Convention: Franklin did not set the agenda for the Convention, and it was not within his power to unilaterally add a public debate over slavery to the proceedings. So to claim that Franklin "refused to debate" slavery is as nonsensical and disingenuous as someone claiming that Joe Biden and Donald Trump "refused to debate" some of the minor independent candidates for the presidency during the 2019 presidential campaign. It's not "refusal to debate"; it's that including someone like (presidential candidate) Kanye West in the debate would not have been productive. At the Convention, Franklin's focus was upon trying to save the fragile Union from James Madison and his supporters, who sought to substantially rewrite the Constitution. Madison, an energetic 36 year-old from Virginia, whose family owned hundreds of slaves, arrived at least a week before the Convention and began lobbying other delegates to support his ambitions. Franklin was 81 years old, and far from the energetic debater he was in his prime. His role was to play "elder statesman" and try to inspire civility between the contentious competing interests. It was Madison and his fellow Southerners such as John Rutledge, James Wilson and Charles Pinckney who came to the Convention with the intention of holding the Union hostage to their demands to preserve slavery. Franklin understood that taking that occasion to "publicly debate slavery" would not only be unproductive (since the Southern delegates would never have agreed to it), but that the very integrity of the Union would likely be lost in the process.
As for the claim that Franklin "never fully divested himself" from the institution of slavery: that would have come as news to Franklin who in 1781 freed his two slaves, in 1786 became President of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, in 1789 published "An Address to the Public" -- a tract calling for abolition, and a few months later, petitioned the Congress to outlaw slavery. That would count as "fully divesting himself" of slavery by even the most stringent of standards. Bricology (talk) 05:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I note that this claim still remains. I really think that given Franklin's well documented opposition to slavery in his later years - not least by becoming an early President of the world's first abolitionist society - the statement needs to be defended or removed. LastDodo (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amigoski.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Lincoln Born Exactly 19 Years After Benjamin Franklin Submitted Bill To Congress To Abolish Slavery

Benjamin Franklin believed in reincarnation. He was the Founding Father who was most antislavery. On February 12, 1790 - just two months before his death - he submitted a bill to the United States Congress to abolish slavery. Of course, it didn't pass and it upset all the Southerners including President George Washington. Exactly 19 years to the day - the Metonic cycle - Abraham Lincoln was born. In Franklin's Autobiography, he didn't include the Committee of Five, July 4, 1776, his ambassadorship to France, his Articles of Confederation, or his involvement in the Constitution. Dr. Franklin said, "I wrote it as a manual for my son William to grow up with (paraphrased)", yet William was already an adult when it was written. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin was one of five books the young Lincoln had access to for awhile on the Indiana frontier. 73.1.207.100 (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I dont know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.8.116.131 (talk) 15:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Nationality

Starting with this one. It's just occurred to me that there is an inherent assumption in all colonial articles about British America that their subjects are always labelled as "American". Despite the fact that the Thirteen Colonies were governed by, financed by, and mostly inhabited by people from the British Isles. It's occurred to me that this is a form of modern myth making that must have been created shortly after the Unites States' victory over the British to distinguish and distance themselves from the very obvious fact (based on their governance, financial arrangements, ethnicity, and loyalties) was they were traitorous rebels to the country where most of them and their families came from. Benjamin Franklin spent more than three quarters of his life as a British subject albeit one in British America, and yet, he is referred to as an American. As someone who has read a lot of books about the American War Independence (and not the jaundiced cut and paste version that wikipedia presents), there was nothing glorious about the causes and conduct of the American side in the conflict (there was no "greater good"). Most of the grievances were weak or had been resolved, ameliorated or placated by the actions of British to appease the likes of Franklin and his Patriot ilk. But they still went to war. The usage of the term American to refer to former British subjects and all that was pretty much English is synonymous with the immediate requirement following securing independence was to create a foundation mythology that justified their actions. I am sure no one back then realised what this meant, but they could see the result. By stating everything was "American" pre 1776 created a continuance that ignored the actual Realpolitik that they were Brits who rebelled. ie not they were Americans, Patriots who were different to the British before and after 1776. Yet this was just a large number of ethnically British people (who - as one of the reasons - no longer wanted to be ruled by a king) fighting other ethnically British people. In conclusion, the use of the term "American" is just flannel to avoid the unpleasant fact to those who won victory in the American War of Independence facing up to the fact that they had to paint their cause in the best possible light. A fact that continues to this day. Franklin was a British colonist, a British subject and a British polymath right up until he became an American citizen of the United States. Something which draws a marked line down on his allegiances and loyalties. However, by calling all Patriots simply Americans avoids having to justify all that have just said because there is a clear distinction. It's much simpler to say they were all Americans, thus as Patriots, the distinction is they were unjustly ruled by the "British". Not that they were British bitching about being British. Franklin was British for most of his life whether he liked it or not. 146.200.202.126 (talk) 09:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

First let me concur that Americans—certainly the general public but also a whole lot of historians—see the Revolutionary War as a conflict between two foreign peoples, the Americans and the British Empire, and that that perspective is incorrect. There are several reasons for that, including an emotional preference for that version rather than something more nuanced but also more historically accurate. But one of the biggest reasons is that they commit the same error you're committing here: projecting their twenty-first-century, post-imperial concept of nationality, where being British and being American are mutually exclusive, onto a period where it's a complete anachronism. British subjects of the eighteenth century absolutely pictured their empire as a federation of different countries and different nationalities, united by all being British (they were often very happy to use "English" instead of "British" in a way that we would object to now) but each nevertheless being their own identity: English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish and, yes, American. Americans were indeed seen as their own national grouping in the decades prior to the Revolutionary War, and were, for instance, listed as such (and referred to themselves as such) at the Inns of Court and at British universities. (There's a fuller exploration to be made about a universal identity as "American" versus regional identities as Pennsylvanian, Virginian, Jamaican, etc., but that's beside the central point here.) It was no more a contradiction that someone from Boston was a Briton and an American than it was that Edmund Burke would speak with pride of being an Irishman and speak with pride of being an Englishman. When Americans before and even during the Revolutionary War spoke of "my country" or "this country", they were invariably referring to an individual province, never to the British Empire as a whole (or even, really, to the United States, once the United States became a thing). As such, the people of the United States didn't invent a new national identity, "American", to replace their abandoned identity "British"; rather they refashioned their existing American identity away from being contained within Britishness to something outside (and to some degree defined in opposition to) Britishness. If you asked Ben Franklin in 1760, his imagination running away with his grandiose dreams for the British transatlantic imperial project, or Ben Franklin in 1790, when he was a genuine anglophobe, "Would you call yourself an American?" the answer in both instances would have been an equally emphatic, "Yes, of course!"

So even absent the American Revolution, "American" would be the most appropriate nationality for the Revolutionary generation just as "Canadian" is the appropriate nationality for us to introduce Alexander Mackenzie. But we're not absent the American Revolution, and every single article on an American Founding Father mentions in its first or second sentence that the subject participated in founding the United States. Thus any reader who knows that the United States was formerly a colony of the British Empire knows that the subject was once a British subject, and then wasn't; and for those readers who don't know that, the opening five or six words of a biographical article are not the place to inform them, and awkwardly crowding in some way of saying "was an American (originally British!!!!) statesman" is not the way to do it.

This duality of nationality persisted as long as the British Empire remained a going concern, by the way. The other Allies objected to the dominions being included in the Paris Peace Conference as equal members, arguing reasonably that they would just be half a dozen separate British votes, but Britain (because the dominions demanded it) pushed back and insisted that no, they were their own countries. But no sooner did the peace conference come to order and break up into its various working committees (the committees included delegates only from Britain, France and the USA, not the other Allies), and members of the Canadian/Australian/South African/New Zealand etc. delegations were showing up as the British members of various committees.

It's also incorrect to say that the Thirteen Colonies were mostly inhabited by people from the British Isles; by 1775 there far more white inhabitants who had been born in America than had been born in Britain or Ireland. By that time it's not even true anymore that the imperial government was uniformly British, much as American depictions of the war would have it otherwise: on the eve of the Revolution, five of the twelve colonial governors (Delaware and Pennsylvania always shared a governor, so there were twelve governors rather than thirteen) were American (Sir John Wentworth, 1st Baronet, Thomas Hutchinson, Jonathan Trumbull, Nicholas Cooke and William Franklin). Even the leadership of the British Army was well-represented with Americans: of the four chiefs of staff the British commanders-in-chief had over the course of the war (Stephen Kemble as deputy adjutant general, then Lord Rawdon, John André and Oliver De Lancey as adjutant general), two of them—Kemble and De Lancey—were Americans of prominent American families who had chosen to seek advancement in the British Empire by pursuing careers as officers in the professional British Army. I'd love it if historiography of the Revolutionary War emphasised that it was a civil war, absolutely, but the historically accurate way to make that point is that both sides intermingled Americans and other British ethnic identities (there's no such thing as being "ethnically British"), not by asserting that no American identity existed. Binabik80 (talk) 22:51, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin was the Grand Master Mason of PA and Believed in Reincarnation

MODERATORS: Please add this tweak to FREEMASONRY - In 1730 or 1731, Franklin was initiated into the Philadelphia Masonic Lodge. He became the Grand Master in 1734, indicating his rapid rise to prominence in Pennsylvania. The same year, he edited and published the first Masonic book in the Americas, a reprint of James Anderson's Constitutions of the Free-Masons. He was the secretary of St. John's Lodge in Philadelphia from 1735-38. Franklin remained an active Mason for the rest of his life. Six months before dying, he went public with his "belief in the transmigration of the soul" (reincarnation). 50.185.129.118 (talk) 16:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done This requires verification from a reliable source. Would you please provide the citation(s)? Peaceray (talk) 03:24, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Please remove FRSA postnominal

The FRSA postnominal should be removed from the lede and infobox. Franklin could not have had this postnominal in his lifetime as the organization only got the Royal title in 1908. (Royal_Society_of_Arts). Moreover, FRSA is not an honor but represents a membership that is open to a wide range of people by paying a subscription. Related discussion here. Historylikeyou (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Done. Historylikeyou (talk) 07:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I undid this removal of the FRSA postnominal. Consensus was not achieved at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography--SouthernNights (talk) 12:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

The MOS policy does not mandate inclusion of the FRSA postnomial, so it could be removed if there is consensus among editors on this page to do so. I will not remove it myself as the change has already been reverted. Historylikeyou (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2022

Benjamin Franklin was never President of the United States . This is false 174.59.62.188 (talk) 01:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The article does not state that he was the president of the United States. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:12, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Common-law marriage to Deborah Read

The section "Common-law marriage to Deborah Read" reads "Franklin established a common-law marriage with Deborah on September 1, 1730." (the Deborah Read page reads: "On September 1, 1730, the couple held a ceremony for friends and family in which they announced they would live as husband and wife.[13]"). This issue has been brought up previously in earlier discussion on talk (it's on talk archive). Firstly, a common law marriage (a term which has a specific legal meaning) is not established by an informal ceremony; it is established as being a valid marriage (usually by a court) after a longer period of living together under certain circumstances as husband and wife. Secondly, a common-law marriage requires capacity of the parties to get married, so if Read was not divorced, could not prove her legal husband was dead, and he wasn't declared presumed dead by a court or a similar situation that would free her to marry, she couldn't have capacity to marry and so a common-law marriage would not be legally valid. I suggest the section should have the tile changed to "Relationship to Deborah Read" and the phrase ""Franklin established a common-law marriage with Deborah on September 1, 1730." should be reformulated. 2A02:2F0F:B009:F100:C982:C408:B0BF:18BF (talk) 20:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Debate to delete a Category

There is a debate over whether to keep Category: Homes of United States Founding Fathers as a category. More opinions are needed. The discussion is located Here -- Gwillhickers (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Libraries

The quote about the Junto's members pooling their individual book collections at one location is right out of his autobiography. This soon led to his invention of lending libraries. From what he had said about his stay in London, it seems they did not exist there either. He says that other towns and regions soon copied the one in Philadelphia. My copy of the autobiography is on the other side of town so I can't give exact quotes or pages, but I just read this yesterday. If the date you mention is correct, then the 300th anniversary of public libraries will be in 8 more years. agb 173.233.167.50 (talk) 16:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I read this part yesterday. It is on page 71 of the Oxford World's Classics version of the Autobiography and Other Writings ISBN 978-0-19-955490-4. I'm not sure how to translate it to the corresponding page number in the source presently used. Should we change the source to the Oxford text perhaps? KetchupSalt (talk) 15:25, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect lightning rod theory

I've come across Franklin's work when working in electrostatics, and the related section could perhaps bear clarifying that Franklin's theory that a sharp tipped rod would discharge lightning clouds thus preventing lightning strikes, doesn't work in practice. That is, lightning rods protect buildings by guiding the lightning strikes to it rather than preventing strikes outright through slow discharge.

It might also be interesting to note that this idea stems from experiments with needles held close to statically charged items which then lost their charge. Franklin isn't the first one to observe that. I don't have a good source for this at the moment, but perhaps if I dig a bit I will find one. What do other editors think? KetchupSalt (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Be bold, you can make changes if you think that aricles requires them, but pls reliable sources. Marcelus (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Walter Isaacson Source Usage

Throughout the article, places where Thomas Jefferson's deism is noted by several reputable sources is often followed with claims that he actually came to regret these views or didn't fully embrace them by quoting a book by Walter Isaacson as the sole source.

Can someone with access to this book clarify the book's sources for this so we may instead use the direct sources? AevumNova (talk) 21:46, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Isaacson says that Ben Franklin never rejected deism, but that late in life he felt it wasn't all that useful when it came to setting moral standards of behavior: "As a young man, he had read John Locke, Lord Shaftesbury, Joseph Addison, and others who embraced the freethinking religion and Enlightenment philosophy of deism, which held that each individual could best discover the truth about God through reason and studying nature, rather than through blind faith in received doctrines and divine revelation. He also read more orthodox tracts that defended the dogmas of Calvinism against such heresies, but he found them less convincing. As he wrote in his autobiography, “The arguments of the deists which were quoted to be refuted appeared to me much stronger than the refutations.”14 Nevertheless, he soon came to the conclusion that a simple and complacent deism had its own set of drawbacks. He had converted Collins and Ralph to deism, and they soon wronged him without moral compunction. Likewise, he came to worry that his own freethinking had caused him to be cavalier toward Deborah Read and others. In a classic maxim that typifies his pragmatic approach to religion, Franklin declared of deism, “I began to suspect that this doctrine, though it might be true, was not very useful.” Although divine revelation “had no weight with me,” he decided that religious practices were beneficial because they encouraged good behavior and a moral society. So he began to embrace a morally fortified brand of deism that held God was best served by doing good works and helping other people." [Isaacson ch 3 p 46] Rjensen (talk) 01:15, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, do you know what he relies on as a source for that quote? It would be very useful for increasing the accessibility of the article and primary sources are stronger then secondary sources. AevumNova (talk) 05:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Birthdate old style

I note a bit of dispute between what year he was born in the old style. The problem was that England and therefore their American colonies did not legally have January 1 as the beginning of the year but instead it was March 25. This was changed in the same year, 1752, they switched from Julian to Gregorian calendars. However a lot of people did use January 1 as the new year even before the change. Historians use dates like January 6, 1705/06 for Old style dates in Jan/Feb/Mar assuming they know which year was meant (e.g., a letter dated January 6, 1705 but no clues as to which New Year [or even which calendar] the author was using or other context that would indicate year, could have been written in 1705 or 1706 Gregorian; a historian would probably list it as January 6, 1705 but footnote to indicate the uncertainty). Erp (talk) 01:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Publication date of autobiography isn't 1771

While he started it then, the first edition was published (in French) in 1791. The bibliographic entry for this work should be a specific and accurate version. For instance:

Franklin, Benjamin (2004) [1791], Houston, Alan (ed.), The "autobiography" and other writings on politics, economics, and virtue (PDF), Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521834964, retrieved 2016-05-03 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagle (talk • contribs) 13:11, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

What "mistress advice" letter?

First of all , there is no such thing as a 'Mistress'. That is a slang term that is unethical and a way of trying to excuse evil, wrong behavior of sex outside of marriage with a woman, regardless of how accepted it was in the vernacular. Where is the citation for the statement that he allegedly wrote a 'letter' advising men on how to choose a woman??? 98.123.126.45 (talk) 05:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Balderdash. 2601:642:4600:3F80:E8A1:AE4:EA88:CD16 (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2023

In the 4th header paragraph, change "governor of Pennsylvania" to "president of Pennsylvania" (at the time, Pennsylvania used the title of president rather than governor) Altorespite (talk) 23:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Letter to Peter Collinson

There's an error in the citation to this letter. A corrected citation is: Franklin, Benjamin (April 29, 1749). "Further Experiments and Observations in Electricity". Letter to Peter Collinson. Retrieved 2023-11-30.

Also, there are two uses of that source that can be combined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4600:3F80:E8A1:AE4:EA88:CD16 (talk) 23:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. GrayStorm (talk) 16:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

There's an error in a citation. Look at the reference list and you will see the error. Fix the error by substituting the code that I provided. 2601:642:4600:3F80:5893:6844:31FE:2F4F (talk) 05:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)