Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John C. Young (college president)/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 28 February 2023 [1].

John C. Young (college president) edit

Nominator(s): PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

John C. Young, the fourth president of Centre College in Danville, Kentucky, was instrumental in saving the "struggling" college; Centre's graduating class size went from two students in his first year to 43 in his last. He served as president for 27 years, longer than any other in Centre's history, before he died in office and was buried in Danville. During his life he was also a minister; he was licensed to preach in 1827 and took the pastorate of Danville's Presbyterian Church four years after coming to Centre. The popularity of his preaching led him to open a new church in Danville in 1852; he was also elected moderator of the Presbyterian Church General Assembly the next year. In addition, he is the namesake of an academic building on campus and was the father of a future Centre president.

This is my second FAC; the first, 2020 US Open (tennis), was archived after I wisely nominated it right before finals week and did not respond to several comments. I was mentored for this nomination by Hog Farm - many thanks go to him for his willingness to assist me. Details can be seen on the article talk page. I look forward to any and all feedback that reviewers can provide! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a follow up to say that I will be happy to provide exact quotes of the Weston source (which I have with me) or the Craig source (which I should have access to again in a couple days) if anybody wants to verify those. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi PCN02WPS, thanks for the comments above. You are correct in surmising that having not yet had an article promoted at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:42, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • File:John_C._Young_by_John_Sartain_(cropped).jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:20, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria I have added a tag to the Commons page detailing US copyright status. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When and where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria The source website says that it was published in the mid-19th century, though it doesn't list a specific date or a location. I can keep looking but I'm not sure what I'll be able to find. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The source website gives the "date" as the mid-19th century, but doesn't specify whether that date was publication or only creation. What is the earliest publication that can be confirmed? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria I have changed the Commons licensing tag to a broader one that doesn't rely solely on publication date; I will do some more digging but at this moment I don't have an exact date or location for creation or publishing. I can reach out to Centre for more info or potentially for a different image if this one isn't suitable for these reasons. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would be helpful - it isn't clear at this point that this would be PD, if publication is uncertain. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Not sure why I hadn't seen this yet - according to Centre's digital archives, the engraving was published in 1890 in the General Catalogue of the Centre College of Kentucky. Location of publication is listed as Danville. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, do you have a link to where it says that? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: Right, I’m sorry about that. Here’s the page I found. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note edit

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it will have to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild Is there anything I can do to get reviewers? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do if the nomination is in danger of failing solely because nobody wants to review it. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 04:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewers are more happy to review articles from people whose name they see on other reviews (although I should say there is definitely no quid pro quo system on FAC). Reviewers are a scarce resource at FAC, unfortunately, so the more you put into the process, the more you will get out, and critically reviewing other people's work may have a beneficial impact on your own writing too - I have certainly found that. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SchroCat is, as always, absolutely correct. In addition, sometimes placing a polite neutrally phrased request on the talk pages of a few of the more frequent reviewers helps. Sometimes one struggles to get reviews because potential reviewers have read the article and decided that it requires too much work to get up to FA standard. I am not saying this is the case here - I have not read the article - just noting a frequent issue. But personally, when browsing the list for an article to review, I am more likely to select one by an editor whom I recognise as a frequent reviewer. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild and SchroCat: thank you both very much, I will do my best to follow through and take both of your advice. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: would it be possible for me to have a little bit more time than is standard so that I can begin a review or two of my own and ask around for some potential reviewers? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll stretch it for an extra couple of days, especially given SchroCat's feedback, but time is of the essence. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Barring something unusual happening, this nom looks safe now :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild sorry to bother you again but I have a procedural question - if I were to want to move the article (to a title suggested below by Ceoil, which I think is much better than the current title), would it be better to wait until after the FAC is completed to do so or (if not) what would be the best way to go about doing so? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New names for articles are often agreed at FAC. I have had it happen during my own nominations. No problem, except please wait until the nomination has closed - one way or the other - and the bot has done its thing. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:08, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC edit

Putting down a marker for review. (Need to finish off another one first, then will be here). - SchroCat (talk) 09:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A word or two about names. A good rule of thumb for each paragraph is to use the name on the first mention and then he (or she) for the rest of the paragraph if there are no other names in the way. You'll see what I mean when you start going through the comments below:

Lead
  • "During his time in office, he continued": "... Young continued"
  • "Young was a respected": "He was..."
  • "part of this work as well": you don't need the last two words
  • "and multiple in support": this reads oddly. Maybe "and several in support"?
  • "He is the namesake of numerous facets of the college today, including Young Hall, which is named for him and his son, William C. Young, who later became the college's eighth president": this makes it look like his son is a facet of the college! You also don't need to call him a namesake, then give an example then repeat it was named for him. Better to rephrase as something like: "He is the namesake of numerous facets of the college today, including Young Hall, which devoted teaching science. His son, William C. Young, later became the college's eighth president."

A quick skim shows a few bits to work on, which I'll pick up on shortly, but it's in good shape and needs only a bit of polishing to get to FA standard. I'll get back to you shortly. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 14:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early life
  • "He moved to New York City": new para, so mention the name at first occurrence. "Young moved..." and there's no need to link NY
  • "Young's uncle" -> "his uncle"
  • "Young eventually" -> "he eventually"
  • "and he graduated": "where he graduated"
  • "New York City": I think I'm right in saying that after the first mention, we can describe it as just "New York"
  • "Young graduated" -> "he graduated"
Early career
  • "Young accepted" -> "he accepted"
President of Centre
  • "He inherited" -> "Young inherited"
  • 'a "struggling" college': I think you need to attribute this description to someone or we're saying it in WP's voice, regardless of the quote marks
  • "Young's primary duty" -> "His primary duty"
  • "Young also served" – "he"
  • "Christian framework";[13] the college": I think I'd swap the semi colon for a full stop. The second part of the sentence is long to stand as part of an even longer one
  • The behaviour of the students: he was President of the college, so this is a little on his shoulders as much as anyone else's: did he do anything about it, or just write that report?
Ministry
  • In the first para there are five uses of "Young": You don't need the last four, which can all be changed to "he"
  • "Young was elected" -> "he was elected"
Personal life
  • "Young was a slaveholder"; "Young was a member"; and "Young himself": All "he"
That's my lot. Aside from the choice of "Young" and "he", there really is very little to complain about. It's on the short side, but I'm going to AGF that you've managed to squeeze out as much encyclopaedic information about him as you can. If you can persuade him to join in, Wehwalt may be able to review – his comments are always ad rem, as are those of Tim riley, who can normally be relied upon to review (when he gets back from holiday). – SchroCat (talk) 18:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HJ Mitchell & David Fuchs, as you were both kind enough to edit at the Hannah Glasse article today (and appear on my watchlist), would you be able to look at this first timer's nomination - it's a rather well-written piece that deserves a bit more attention. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SchroCat Thank you for the review and for your helpful advice! I believe I have taken care of all of the "Young"/"he" fixes and your other comments with one exception - I wasn't able to find anything about action taken as a direct consequence of the drunkenness issue, only that he mentioned it in a report, and I didn't want to speculate at all. I swapped out the "struggling" bit with another quip from a book I used and I attributed it to a "Centre historian", though if I need to use the author's name I can. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:01, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Another readthrough and I'm happy with the changes - good work! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil edit

Starting to read. Would John C. Young (pastor) be a better title. Ceoil (talk) 23:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceoil: thank you for being willing to take this on! I have had some second thoughts about the title ever since I created the page; John C. Young (minister) was another thought of mine, though I'm not sure how the logistics of that would work with the FAC (whether we'd change it now or after the FAC concludes). PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined towards pastor, and dropping the pretentious " C." (although haven't looked at the name that bring the better google hits). "college president" seems very uppity, waspy and off-putting to me. I don't think a pg move during FAC would be an issue, but will leave it up to you. Ceoil (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue to keep the middle initial as that is by far the more common name as far as I have seen - essentially every source includes the middle initial. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thats fine. Its very will written overall; late here but will look again in a few days. Ceoil (talk) 01:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceoil Sounds good, thank you! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources: Why are some book sources listed in the "sources", and others (Przybyszewski, Wright, Merritt) listed in the "citations".
  • Sources: Lewis is both 1899 and is a Ph.D. thesis, but seems fine for the claims its used for.
  • Link pastor in the lead
  • link General Assembly (presbyterian church) in lead

Early life

  • Do we know what classical school?
  • Ditto which college
  • transferred to Dickinson College, in his native Pennsylvania - don't need the comma
  • and specifically the interpretation

Career

  • Additionally, he also can drop also
  • had nobody to fill them - unfilled
  • Later in the week, on May 23

These are all exceedingly trivial...as said the writing is first class...crisp and clear....Support Ceoil (talk) 02:32, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceoil: thank you for the review - I appreciate your support and I have made the changes you've suggested. Unfortunately I don't know the classical school he went to, but the colleges he attended are detailed in the second paragraph of "Early life and education". As for the citations vs. sources, I think I moved books to "sources" if I used them more than once, though I'm not sure if this is backed up by any policy. If you think I should move them all to "sources" I am happy to do so. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NP. I'd name Columbia in the first rather than second paragraph, and given how MOS orientated FAC is, detail any books used in "sources". Ceoil (talk) 05:03, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The logic for that is a the better students don't read the article when researching, but to straight to the gathered sources. Ceoil (talk) 06:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After his first academic year as president, he delivered... - during? Otherwise it could mean "in his last year". Ceoil (talk) 05:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceoil: I moved the three books to sources (Merritt, Shepardson, and Wright) - that's all that I can spot. I have changed "After his first academic year..." to "After the conclusion of his first academic year" in an attempt to emphasize the fact that the speech took place after the first year had finished. As for Columbia, I would prefer to keep that in the second paragraph of "Early life and education" as opposed to the first since the section is ordered chronologically; the first paragraph is birth/childhood and the second paragraph begins with him going off to school. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Moving all books to sources is the usual style - makes it handier if students etc are looking for jump off-reference points for further research, esp as most are using mobile view. Ceoil (talk) 00:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude edit

  • "as he increased the endowment" - is there an appropriate wikilink to "endowment"? I am not familiar with this term (maybe it's US-specific and we call it something else over here....?)
(talk page stalker) It's common in the UK in the same context. But see Financial endowment. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:12, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image captions which are not complete sentences (eg the grave one) don't need a full stop
  • "as was the Synod of Kentucky, many other southern synods, and both of Danville's Presbyterian Churches" => "as were the Synod of Kentucky, many other southern synods, and both of Danville's Presbyterian Churches"
  • "Young remarried a few years later to Cornelia Crittenden, the daughter of Governor John J. Crittenden, in 1839" - "a few years later" is redundant to the fact that you state the specific year
  • Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude thank you very much for the review - I have taken care of everything you mentioned! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A side-note to add that I linked "endowment" to Financial endowment but I can link it to the relevant section in that article (Financial endowment#Modern college and university endowments) if you think that would be better. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Tim riley edit

  • General: when mentioning a place within a larger place, e.g. Danville, Kentucky, we link only the first location and not the second: see MOS:LINKSTYLE.
As I understand your comment, linking "Kentucky" individually - as in Danville, Kentucky - is improper; from what I can see, that does not appear in the article, though it is very possible I am misunderstanding. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not at all expert in the MoS, but I think the prescribed form is [[Danville, Kentucky|Danville]], Kentucky Tim riley talk 10:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Tim riley My impression from the MoS page you linked (first bullet point in that section) is that linking as "[[Danville, Kentucky]]" and as "[[Danville, Kentucky|Danville]], Kentucky" are both valid - from what I can see they are referred to as "direct" and "piped" linking, respectively. In any case, I appreciate your review and your support! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early life and education
  • A blue link to "Bible" seems overdoing it.
Removed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early career and inauguration
  • "following year following his graduation" – two followings in a row: could be better phrased.
Reworded, since the "following year" is a little redundant because the exact year starts the next sentence. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he was appointed the pastorate" – is there a preposition missing here?
added "to" PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • President of Centre College
  • "taught within a Christian framework" – we don't blue-link major religions: see MOS:OL
Removed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ministry and involvement with the Presbyterian Church
  • "the town at-large" – the phrase is not hyphenated in any dictionary I know.
Removed hyphen. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Regarded by many Centre historians as one of the college's best presidents, Young's administration" – dangling modifier.
Changed "Young's administration" to "Young and his administration". PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these few points are of use. Tim riley talk 11:40, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley Thank you very much for the comments - I have addressed your points and left one comment in response above! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to support. The article seems comprehensive and neutral, is well referenced, readable and duly illustrated. Tim riley talk 10:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review edit

Footnote numbers refer to this version.

  • Missing publisher location for Merritt (2011).
  • The web citations seem to be inconsistent about whether they use publisher=. For example, FN 8 doesn't use publisher; nor does FN 46, which cites Centre College as the website. On the other hand, FN 47, which also cites Centre College, makes them the publisher. Are the Centre College ones using publisher whenever it's not the main Centre College website? If so, I think that's fine, but there are still a couple of others I'm not clear on the logic for, such as FNs 3, 4, 8, 22 (where it's not clear that Handbook of Texas is really the name of the website; looks to me like it's just part of the TSHA Online website), 26, 27, and 28.
    • Yes, that's what I did; for the Centre ones that were not on Centre's main website (and the same for the one Dickinson reference), I just added Centre as the publisher. For the footnotes you mentioned, I think I have made those consistent but if there's something still that needs to be fixed let me know. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought something looked familiar about the article, and I see now that I did the GA review for James McChord. I noticed because I was about to question the reliability of FN 8, which is just a church website. It is used to cite "McChord Presbyterian Church ... founded in 1813 by James McChord, who was later elected as the first president of Centre College in Danville, Kentucky". Looking at the article on McChord I remember now that he began preaching in 1813, but you give 1815 as the date of the church's founding, with a slightly different name sequence -- it was originally "Market Street Church" according to the sources you use there. You also have an impeccable source in that article for his election as Centre College's first president, so I'd suggest switching to that.
    • I have amended the founding date to read 1815 and replaced the existing FN 8 with the CentreCyclopedia reference about McChord, which is used on his article to reference his election. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • presbyteriansofthepast.com appears to be a one-person website; the author asserts he has a relevant PhD, but it would be nice to find a better source. I found this in newspapers.com, which I think should do. I see the newspaper article draws a distinction between Old School and New School (which met in Buffalo); I know nothing about this history but is that a necessary disambiguation we should mention in the article?
    • I have replaced the Presbyterians of the Past reference with your newspaper clipping reference; as for Old School vs. New School, that is mentioned in the paragraph before the reference in question is used (para 1 of "Ministry and involvement with the Presbyterian Church"). PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Re the Old School, what I meant was that the article says "the 1853 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church", but there were two general assemblies that year. I know we've already said he's Old School, but shouldn't we let the reader know that the division included separate assemblies, and that we're referring to the Old School one here? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha, fixed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • And looking through the links I see you already have a relevant link in FN 31 that you could use instead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:48, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes presbydan.org a reliable source for history? Per the comments above about FN 8 I don't think individual church websites can be treated as reliable for this sort of thing, unless there's evidence of some editorial research and control for those pages, which I would guess are often written by whoever in the congregation is willing to spend a bit of time in a library.
    • I have replaced this, see above. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Looks like it's still in the article as FN 26? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Good catch, I have replaced this with the Weston (2019) source, direct quote: "Eventually, the college-based congregation outgrew the existing church building, especially after the great revival of 1846 brought 120 new members into the church. In 1852, Young founded the Second Presbyterian Church of Danville." PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for formatting and reliability. I'll look at links next, and then do spotchecks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Links:

  • I can't get the archive link for FN 32 to work.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:48, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks:

  • FN 3 cites "His uncle, Matthew St. Clair Clarke, a practicing lawyer and seven-term U.S. House Clerk". I don't see support for "practicing lawyer".
    • I have added FN 1 as a citation for that phrase; the direct quote is "...having declined an offer to enter the profession of the Law, under the auspices of his maternal uncle, Matthew St. Clair Clarke, at that time an eminent practitioner and politician." Googling "practitioner" makes it sound like he was in medicine, but his Wikipedia article mentions he was admitted to the bar and practiced law, and Wiktionary says that practitioner can refer to law, which I think it's fair to say that it does in this context. If you think this link is too tenuous I can just take "a practicing lawyer" out and leave the law bit to be covered by "offered to mentor him in a law-based profession". PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I tried finding the source for the Wikipedia article's statements about law, but I don't have access to the ADNB, which is where I think it must come from. I would cut it for now; it looks like the ADNB is going to be available in the Wikipedia Library so you could re-add when that access is available. I don't think we can add it based on another Wikipedia article when we can't trace the source that was used there. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no issue with removing it, so I've done that. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • FNs 2 & 9 cite "Centre's presidency became vacant in October 1830 when Gideon Blackburn resigned the office". Verified. FN 9 is enough by itself but that's not a problem.
  • FN 12 cites "Several aspects of Centre College are named in honor of Young. Young Memorial Hall, named for both John and William, was dedicated on January 8, 1909, and was the college's first building devoted entirely to science". Mostly fine but as far as I can see only the Hall (and its replacement) are mentioned, so "several aspects" probably needs one of the other citations in the article to reinforce this.
    • Since I get into more detail about the other stuff that's named after him, with refs, later in the section, I have changed "Several aspects" to "Among the aspects"; does this solve the problem? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, but looks like you didn't finish editing that sentence -- presumably it should be something like "Among the aspects of Centre College that are named in honor of Young is Young Memorial Hall, named for...". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I have made that sentence grammatical. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN 17 cites "He became concerned with the behavior of the students as his tenure progressed; in an 1845 report to the Board of Trustees, he made note of the increased rate of drunkenness among the students and noted "[the College] has been in a worse condition in respect to good order than it has ever been since I have been connected with it." Verified.
  • FN 22 cites "Other graduates during his term included ... Andrew Phelps McCormick (1854)." Verified.
  • FN 25 cites "Around this time he was offered the presidency at Transylvania University due to his successes in Danville, though he ultimately opted to stay at Centre." Verified.
  • FN 39 cites "At the time of his death, Young was working on The Efficacy of Prayer, a treatise described by The Evangelical Repository as "worthy of the subject and the author". The work was published posthumously by the Presbyterian Board of Publishing." Verified.
  • FN 43 cites "and proposed the addition of a clause providing for gradual emancipation in the new state constitution in 1849". Verified.

Two issues, both are minor as in those cases the source does verify most of the information in the quote. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie Thank you for taking the time to review this - I have left comments and responses above! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Christie ready for another look! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. Fixes all look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:32, 27 February 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/John_C._Young_(college_president)/archive1&oldid=1142084640"