Talk:Sir William Johnson, 1st Baronet

Weissenberg & Johnson marriage

From the article:

"Sir William Johnson and Catherine Weissenberg were never married and so their son John was illegitimate and should never have inherited the baronetcy. This has now (in 2013) been brought to the attention of the Ministry of Justice at the House of Lords in London by a 5 x great grand daughter of Catherine Weissenberg."

O'Toole, extensively cited in this article, goes into this question of whether or not the couple was legally married. He presented pro and con sides of the topic, but as far as I remember, could not reach a definitive answer with the data at hand. Are you saying that this question has been settled? How so? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 16:39, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sir William Johnson, 1st Baronet/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 17:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I'll take this article for review, and will post my full review in the next day or so. Dana boomer (talk) 17:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   • Per WP:LEAD, the lead section for an article this size should be three to four paragraphs.
   • Standardize to either British or American English. I see both honor and honour and -ize and -isation.
   • Entire article needs a copy edit. In even a quick skim I'm seeing improper punctuation and spelling errors.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • Several dead or suspicious links, see the Toolserver report.
   • Citation needed tag in Postwar development section.
   • Pontiac's War and final years section is largely unreferenced, and needs a copy edit.
   • Majority of Death and legacy section is unreferenced (all but first paragraph).
   • In popular culture section is unreferenced trivia.
   • Ancestors section is unreferenced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   • Mostly just vandalism reverts, and latest 100 edits go back over three years.

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

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

   • File:Johnson Hall by Henry.jpg needs some attention to its tags.
   • File:Sir John Johnson.jpg needs source information.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   While it appears that someone has done quite a bit of work on this article (apparently not the nominator), it is not of GA status yet, and several years have passed since the last cleanup of the article. The deficiencies in referencing is the biggest issue, and will take the longest to fix. Because the article does not meet many of the GA criteria (see WP:WIAGA for the full criteria), I am failing this article's nomination for GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 18:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hawkeye.

O'Toole wrote about Sir William being the inspiration for James Fennimore Cooper's iconic Leatherstocking Tales "Hawkeye" character. As a younger man, Johnson was agile (prior to his gunshot wound), adventurous, had an affinity with the Natives, and traveled throughout the Iroquois lands, dressed in a Bohemian-style mixture of European and Native clothing (as pictured in the West portrait assigned to Guy Johnson, but thought by O'Toole to be of Sir William). If someone has O'Toole's book and can look up the page and wording, I think that this is a fairly significant bit of information. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 06:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Color version of info-box portrait.

This is a copy taken from the same lost portrait that the info-box etching is copied from, only in delicious color! And due to the Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. copyright decision, it is ripe for plucking. (I've read that uploading images to WP is very complicated, so I haven't tried to learn how as yet.) http://www.nyhistory.org/exhibit/sir-william-johnson-1715-1774

All the best, Wordreader (talk) 04:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sir William Johnson, 1st Baronet. 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/20060622142738/http://indiancastle.com/ICNHL.htm to http://indiancastle.com/ICNHL.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928094612/http://www.carf.info/kingstonpast/mollybrant.php to http://www.carf.info/kingstonpast/mollybrant.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110907075005/http://haldimand-collection.ca/b-010-correspondence-with-sir-william-johnson-and-papers-on-indian-affairs-1759-to-1774 to http://haldimand-collection.ca/b-010-correspondence-with-sir-william-johnson-and-papers-on-indian-affairs-1759-to-1774

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) 01:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)