Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1867 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 15 April 2023 [1].

1867 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania edit

Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... one of the more important Senate elections in 19th century Pennsylvania, not so much the election itself, but the maneuvering to gain the Republican endorsement, which was tantamount to election then. Enjoy.Wehwalt (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • Don't use fixed px size
I've copied it now straight from the infobox template example.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Smn_Cameron-SecofWar.jpg is tagged as lacking author info, and when and where was this first published?
I've changed the PD rationale.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still tagged as lacking author info? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, I've explicitly stated that the author is unknown. This doesn't seem to affect the copyright status, the LOC views it as no known restrictions. Is this satisfactory?--Wehwalt (talk) 00:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Edgar_Cowan_-_Brady-Handy.jpg needs a US tag. ditto File:John_W._Geary_-_Brady-Handy.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Added.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the image review.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HF - support edit

Will review in a day or two. Hog Farm Talk 23:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Should the Civil War be mentioned at some point in the background, especially given Cameron's post as Secretary of War and Curtin's position as an influential wartime governor?
  • Was Curtin term-limited in 1866?
  • I wouldn't call the stuff in Note [a] to be common knowledge, so recommend citing it directly
  • Spot-checked the refs to Stewart 1972 and didn't see any issues

I think that's all from me. Hog Farm Talk 04:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Those things are done. Wehwalt (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support edit

Good article. No comments here, although I made a couple of very minor MOS tweaks. - SchroCat (talk) 22:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the review and support.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review edit

Spotchecks not done

  • Be consistent in when/if locations are included
  • Akagi's forename as given doesn't match source. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All fixed, thank you very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wehwalt, how's this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've completed the responses from the source review. Whenever the comments from those who have left placeholders come in, I plan on dealing with them promptly and that should be that I hope. Wehwalt (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hi Nikkimaria, how is this one now? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One item pending on image review. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked on it there, hopefully it is satisfactory. Wehwalt (talk) 00:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie891 edit

Eddie891, nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I've totally forgotten. I'll have a read through after PCN02 to avoid commenting on the same things Eddie891 Talk Work 19:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Eddie891 I just wrapped up my review, feel free to give the article a look now. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll have a read-through. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Federal law prescribed that the senatorial election was to take place beginning on the second Tuesday after the two houses of the legislature which would be in office when the senatorial term expired" Is quite a mouthful and I think a bit hard to follow. Could it be broken up a bit or rephrased?
I'd ask you to read Z1720's comments on this in this prior FAC. I used identical text.
  • "He resigned after less than a year, during the Civil War, under pressure from Lincoln and Congress" I don't think it's particularly clear who 'he' is here
  • "After helping gain the election of James Pollock as governor" maybe "helping James Pollock gain election as governor" would flow better?
  • Maybe linke Favorite son?
  • "—Cameron had, thirty years previously, penned such a "spontaneous" letter on behalf of Andrew Jackson under similar circumstances" While interesting, is this really relevant to this article?
I guess it explains why Lincoln asked him and how Cameron got this chance to rehabilitate himself politically.
  • Suggest linking patronage
  • Our article puts "waving the bloody shirt" in quotes. Perhaps do here too?
  • Could you put how many seats total were in the legislature, for context?
  • U.S. speaker of the house Galusha Grow" Why would you not capitalize S and H here?
  • "but Cowan received a majority of the vote and his nomination was made unanimous" maybe mention before this that Cowan had become (?) a member of the Democratic party?
As far as I know, he never did. The Dems just chose him to receive their votes. They knew he wasn't going to win, and he was an ally of Johnson, whom they supported. I don't have a source that discusses their motivation
  • "There were accusations of corruption in Cameron's election" made by who?
Added. Allegations of corruption were made after each of Cameron's first three elections to the Senate, probably least justified in 1867.

I think that's pretty much it from me, minor things. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think I've dealt with everything. If I haven't specifically responded, I've gone ahead and done it.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Eddie891, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support, fine work as usual. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PCN02WPS edit

  • Claiming my spot, I'll have a read before the end of the weekend. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PCN02WPS, per Eddie's comment above it seems that you're up next. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm beginning soon, should have them up this afternoon. Sorry about the delay @Gog the Mild @Wehwalt PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:11, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries PCN02WPS, Wikipedia isn't going anywhere. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Linking incumbent could be helpful to readers unfamiliar with the term
  • "different faction of the Republican Party, and had clashed as early as 1855" → I don't think the comma after "Party" is necessary

Background

  • "Federal law prescribed that the senatorial..." → I don't think this sentence needs the comma near its end, though then this gives "would be in office when the senatorial term expired convened and chose legislative officers" and "expired convened", an example of center embedding, isn't ideal; I'm not 100% sure how to avoid this though.
I'd say just keep it as is. This is more or less the same sentence as is at 1899 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, and was modified after comments in its FAC. I'd say the comma is needed for clarity. Remember, it's easy for readers to get lost in long stretches without commas, especially on unfamiliar subject matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable, struck. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:05, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the following day at noon, the candidate would" → comma can be removed here
Rephrased.
  • "who had resigned to become United States Secretary of State" → since it's not directly qualifying a person, just naming the office, "secretary of state" can be lowercase
  • "After achieving the election ... he was given the post..." → this wording is a little confusing, are you saying that Curtin himself achieved the election, or his campaigns, or the party he supported?
Rephrased.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "prevent Cameron from receiving a cabinet post" → readers unfamiliar with government might benefit from a link to Cabinet (government)
  • "filled in 1867, Edgar Cowan, also a lawyer, had also been a Whig orator" → a little hard to parse with the commas and repetition of "also", maybe tweak to "filled in 1867, the lawyer Edgar Cowan, had also been a Whig orator"?
  • "attorney, and later, as a prosecutor, and joined" → commas unnecessary here, can be simplified to "attorney and later as a prosecutor, and joined..."
Up to date. If I haven't specifically commented, I've gone ahead and done it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Planning

  • "which had fallen into disrepair with his absence from the state" → if you want to imply causation, replacing "with" with "due to" or "because of" would do better here
  • "Governor Curtin was known as "the soldier's friend", and received praise" → comma before "and" can be removed
  • "He also saw to it Pennsylvania sent" → could read better inserting word so that it reads "He also saw to it that Pennsylvania sent..."

1866 campaign

  • "Republicans in the 1866 campaign originated the style of campaigning" → minor, but "campaign" is a tad repetitive (emphasis mine)
  • "sometimes introducing the main speaker" → "and sometimes introduced..." to keep with past tense of the sentence
  • "several times in the campaign" → "during the campaign" sounds more natural to me
  • "unusual for legislators to bolt the party" → I have not heard this term before, does "bolt the party" mean "vote against one's own party"?


Maneuvering

  • "Other contenders, each of whom had only minimal, regional support were" → add comma after "support" to complete the appositive phrase

Final days and election

  • "L. Kauffman, a Stevens supporter" → is Kauffman important other than the fact that he was a supporter of Stevens? If not, this could be simplified to just read "A Stevens supporter wrote to the congressman..."
That's one approach, but then someone will put {{who}} tag is. Although not much seems to be known about Kauffman--I looked for a first name in vain--I'd say it's better to give the reader the information than deprive them of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See the language about "comparable values" in MOS:NUMNOTES.
Fair point, I guess I hadn't read that far along in the sentence when I wrote that comment. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Control of the speakership, and its powers to assign members to committees" → comma can be removed

Aftermath

  • "Grant appointed Curtin as Minister to Russia in 1869" → lowercase "minister"; this also needs changing in paragraph 3 of "Background" since I missed that one first time around

See also

That's all for content, I'll come back for another readthrough and some source checks later tonight. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think I'm up to date. Again, if I haven't responded, I've done what you suggest.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All good above. Most sources are offline but I have spotchecked what I can below.
  • FN 1: "In drafting the Constitution, the members of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 agreed that United States Senators would be chosen by state legislatures, not by the people." -- verified, though this extends backwards to page 509 as well (specifically with the mention of the year 1787)
  • FN 43: "Glass used his control of committee assignments to influence supporters of Stevens, Grow and other minor candidates." -- verified
  • FN 53: "Ambitious young politicians, such as Matthew Quay, drifted into the Cameron camp, with the alternative being political oblivion." -- verified
  • FN 55: quote and context -- verified.
  • FN 56: The last sentence of the paragraph is verified, but "Many rank-and-file Republicans..." through "...Colfax of Indiana" is not from what I can see.
As far as reference formatting goes, links could be added to FN 49 (Wilkes University) and the bibliography listings for Agagi, Furniss, Kelley '63, and Kelley '66 (all for Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography); Bradley (University of Pennsylvania Press), Bybee (Northwestern University Law Review), Kahan (University of Nebraska Press), Kehl (University of Pittsburgh Press), and Stewart (Pennsylvania History (journal)). The FN 1 page numbers and the content covered by FN 56, as well as the reference wikilinks are the only outstanding issues I have; the article is very well-written and comprehensive, and I learned quite a bit! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've dealt with the 1 and 56 matters, in both cases the material starts at the bottom of the previous page and I've modified the cites accordingly, and added an additional cite to deal with Schuyler Colfax. I've added those links. All done I think. Glad you enjoyed it.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Happy to support. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/1867_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania/archive1&oldid=1150036847"