Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James Davis (printer)/archive1

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 archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 18 May 2022 [1].

James Davis (printer) edit

Nominator(s): Gwillhickers (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about, James Davis (printer) the first postmaster of the colony of North Carolina. He was also the founder and printer of the North-Carolina Gazette, North Carolina colony's first newspaper. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

I've copyedited; let me know if you disagree with any of the changes.

I think giving the move to New Bern in the "Early and family life" section is confusing; it gets repeated in the "Printing career" section. I think it would make more sense to cut the mention of the move to New Bern from the first section, and also move the mention of his acquisition of property there into the next section, where it makes more chronological sense.
Also in the first section it appears Thomas took over the business in 1785, but from the account lower down it appears he must have done so in 1782.
I think some tightening is needed. In ≤some places the material you cover seems trivial, or stated wordily. Some examples:
- "In 1751, as the official printer for the colony, Davis completed an edition of the Laws of North Carolina. It consisted of one volume in folio, and contained five hundred and eighty pages" -> "Davis printed a 580-page folio edition of the Laws of North Carolina". Presumably that title should be in italics? You don't need to say he does this because he's the official printer; we already know that.
- "At the age of 28, he became the first printer to set up a print shop in that colony in New Bern" followed a couple of sentences later by "On June 24, 1749, he began setting up his print shop on Pollock Street in New Bern". And the second sentence adds "which included his printing press, which he had acquired while in Virginia"; it would be more natural, and shorter, to say he already owned a press when mentioning his move from Virginia.
- "subsequently was given a commission as a magistrate, during the administration of William Tryon, governor of North Carolina from 1764 to 1771" -> "was given a commission as a magistrate by North Carolina's governor, William Tryon".
- "Just before and during the American Revolution, paper became scarce, and hence expensive, while delivery costs also rose sharply because of inflation. Davis appealed to the General Assembly for more money to print North Carolina's laws but their budget could not provide Davis with the money he required to keep his printing establishment solvent. Subsequently Davis was forced to resign his position to avert any continued loss of money." -> "Just before and during the American Revolution, paper became scarce, and hence expensive, and delivery costs also rose sharply. Davis appealed to the General Assembly for more money to print North Carolina's laws but they could not pay Davis as much as the laws cost him to print, and he was forced to resign as official printer."
There are also some minor punctuation tweaks needed; normally I'd fix these myself but I since I am going to suggest a copyeditor take a look at the article they should be able to resolve these. For example "paper money, (promissory notes), for..." has parentheses and parenthetical commas; you need one or the other, but not both. These are minor but do need to be fixed.
'The Gazette earned Davis the title, "The Father of Journalism in North Carolina".' I think we need to attribute this a bit more; is he generally known that way in all histories of the state, or is this a bit of purple prose from one historian?

Oppose on prose. I've only skimmed the second half of the article; the oppose is based on what I saw in just the first half. The research has clearly been done, but I think a copyedit by someone who has licence to tighten and reorganize would help a good deal. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thanks for taking on this review. I've begun editing the prose and so forth per your recommendations and will ping you again when I've addressed all the issues in question. Thanks also for your edits. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I qualified the term "The Father of Journalism in North Carolina" as coming from a North Carolina historian. Since Davis is the one who established North Carolina's first printing operation and Newspaper the tribute seems appropriate as it exemplifies Davis' primer role and his industry . However, if you insist I'll omit this. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After a quick search, these are the sources I found that refer to Davis as the father of journalism in N.C.

— Book: History of North Carolina: The colonial and revolutionary periods

— University of North Carolina

— Book: North Carolina: a guide to the old north state

If you still feel this is not enough to refer to Davis as such I'll remove the statement. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm going to hold off on reading through again and taking a look at the fixes till another reviewer has taken a look. The article will need multiple supports for promotion, so if another reviewer supports I'll revisit at that point. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, meanwhile I'll continue to look for any other issues and needed tweaks, etc. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment - I'm sorry, but at about three weeks in and with no general supports and an outstanding oppose, this one will have to be archived in a couple days if significant progress towards a consensus to promote does not form. Hog Farm _Talk 16:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hog Farm: The article was nominated on April 20, but the review was just started up a couple of days ago. I'm hoping that we can get at least a few more days, as all the issues brought to my attention have been addressed, along with a few other improvements made. Also, does it require more than one reviewer to approve the article for FA? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At a minimum, it requires three general supports, a formal source review, and a formal image review, but more than three supports can be asked for depending on the circumstances.Hog Farm _Talk 22:09, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds appropriate. Since reviews seem to take a long time even getting started, I'm hoping enough time will be allowed to get other reviewers to this article. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FACs aren't kept open indefinitely in wait for reviews, and are archived if they aren't getting reviews after a certain amount of time. If progress towards a consensus to promote is not forthcoming over the next several days, I'm sorry but it will still need to be archived and then renominated (although if it has to be archived without getting any further reviews, I'd be willing to waive the renomination waiting period). Hopefully it doesn't require that, but if it does have to be archived, it would probably be best to get a few reviewers lined up. I don't know how active the project is, but have you tried leaving a neutrally worded message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Carolina? Hog Farm _Talk 03:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll drop a word in the N.C. project, and maybe one at another appropriate location, not sure where else a the moment. Many thanks for your advice. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm:, I've left notices requesting reviewers at three different places: ( 1, 2, 3 ). Hopefully this effort will pan out in time. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment - I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to archive this one. There's normally a two-week wait between taking another article to FAC after an archival, but I'm waiving that here due to the minimal feedback. Hog Farm _Talk 13:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Hog Farm _Talk 13:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.