Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peter Jones (missionary)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates‎ | Peter Jones (missionary)
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 not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 03:54, 24 September 2008 [1].

Peter Jones (missionary)

edit
Nominator(s): WilyD


I'm nominating this article for featured article because it passed its GA review without any points to address, and was recommended as "FA with a few minor fixes" by the reviewer. I think it stands as an excellent article with mostly MOS or phrasing minor fixes to be Featured. No clear fixes remain to be done, and all that. It's my first time here, please be gentle. WilyD 21:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image check
As a courtesy, I have changed the link for the source of Image:CreditMission1827SketchFromRyersonsBook.png to http://www.gutenberg.org/files/24586/24586-h/24586-h.htm#i2 so that people don't have to keep on looking for it.
Image:PeterAndElizaJonesPortraitsByMatildaJonesSideBySide.png needs a new copyright tag.
Okay, I fixed this. It should've been PD-UK-known, not PD-UK, which must've been deprecated and deleted. Matilda Jones died in 1856, so that's straightforward. WilyD 22:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image:PeterJones1845InScotlad.jpg The link to Robert Adamson leads to a dab.
Disambig now skipped. WilyD 22:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing as above for Image:ElizaJonesPhotographByHillAndAdamsonEdinburgh1845.png
I've skipped this disambig now as well WilyD 22:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, everything looks good. As a said comment, the picture Image:PeterEdmundJonesSmithsonian1898.PNG in the article is squishing the {{reflist}}. Pie is good (Apple is the best) 22:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments from Maralia A few quick notes (I haven't read this yet but taken a brief glance for the 'obvious' since you said it's your first FAC):
  • Use endashes, rather than hyphens, in date ranges and page ranges.
  • Okay, how do I tell the difference? WilyD 22:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It can be hard to see the difference (endash – vs hyphen -), but I'm looking, and I see hyphens. This article explains how to type an endash on any OS; alternatively, you can use the html code &endash;. Endashes are unspaced, so you would end up with something like 1839–1882. Maralia (talk) 00:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I copy-pasted it into dates and ranges, but I'm unclear on whether to use a dash or an endash for hyphenated words. Is that an issue? WilyD 00:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You missed a few (refs 16, 58 and 73). To answer your questions: Hyphenated words (one-room) use plain old hyphens. Endashes are used between words only when indicating a range (April–May) or comparing or connecting disparate things (Indian–American relations). Maralia (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah hell. Yeah, I forgot about the references' page ranges. WilyD 01:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The items in the Bibliography section don't seem to have been used as references. If that's the case, the section should probably be named Further reading.
  • Bibliography in this case refers to a list of works he authored, rather than used to author this. I can see how that might be confusing, but I'm not sure what else to call a bibliography. WilyD 22:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see. Bibliography is an acceptable section name for that (albeit confusing), but since the section is part of the actual article, it should come before the References. Maralia (talk) 00:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've re-ordered. WilyD 00:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference formatting needs some attention. I see 'last name, first name' authors and 'first last' authors. Additionally, some online references are lacking access dates.
  • I've adjusted all the cite templates to use first and last rather than author. WilyD 23:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've reverified the undated web reference and noted it. For references that exist online that were first published elsewhere, I have not added an accessdate, I think a publication date should be sufficient. Those links are more a courtesy, not a reference, I think. I'd rather not, unless the MOS says I absolutely have to. WilyD 00:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It depends: did you use the original publication, and merely provide the online link as a courtesy? Or did you use the online site as your source? Maralia (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah dammit, that's just so tacky ... I mean, I'l work up the courage to change that soon. WilyD 01:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Online references now all have accessdates. WilyD 17:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image placement needs a little work: some of the images are encroaching on section headers (particularly the 'Jones' widow Eliza' image).
  • I've taken a hack at this, but it's possibly still troublesome? This point has long vex'd me. WilyD 18:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section titles should be in sentence case (i.e. only capitalize the first word and proper names).
  • This is done. My bad, I know better than that. WilyD 23:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image captions should end in a full stop only if they form a complete sentence.
  • Okay, I've reworded the only noncompliant caption to be compliant. WilyD 00:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Several of the captions are only long nominal groups, not complete sentences (the feather, medal, and first home captions). Maralia (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh I see. Alright, I change, I change. WilyD 01:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The disambig links tool (in the toolbox above) shows several links that lead to disambiguation pages; please refine those links.
  • I believe I've fixed them all now ... WilyD 00:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The double portrait image has an invalid permission type.
I'll try to get back and give this a full read-through. Good luck! Maralia (talk) 22:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by jimfbleak A couple of issues in the lead

  • he enabled to Methodists - the Methodists
  • The Mississaugas of New Credit have since been able to retain title to the land, where they remain. In ill health by this time ... - As written, this time appears to be now? jimfbleak (talk) 05:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dumb errors that creep in when there are too few eyes. I've reworked them. WilyD 13:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 18:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes the following reliable sources:
    • http://www.frcna.org/messenger/Archive.ASP?Issue=200405&Article=1098711706 (and the succeeding articles)
      • These are reprints of articles published by the Free Reformed Churches of North America. They strike me as a reasonable publisher in context (i.e. I'd never cite them for a science article or whatnot, but for the history of a 19th century missionary, I think it's okay). Their publication leans "very heavily" on Sacred Feathers anyway, so I could probably shift cites that way, but I don't want to, as I already lean heavily on it. WilyD 15:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The problem is that the site itself doesn't have a reputation for fact checking. I'd go ahead and use the book, honestly. When your article appears on the main page, you'll be happy you don't have any borderline references in it, because folks will look for anything to criticize. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Is there some standard way to work this out? Free Reformed Publications is the publishing house of Free Reformed Churches of North America. Nominally, I can't find much one way or the other. While specialty, I can't convince myself that it's not decently respectable. The publication The Messenger does have an editor and an assistant editor [2] which inclines me to believe there's some level of fact checking/editing. WilyD 18:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Same goes for published sources. If this was a local history society, it'd be easier to judge. But it's a church publication, and thus somewhat outside their usual information. On the plus side, they do list the fact that they get their information from a published source, on the minus side, it's unlikely that they are used to dealing with specifically historical issues, so there might be unintentional bias. ( don't doubt that they won't be intentionally inaccurate, its the unintentional we have to be worried about in this case. ) Ealdgyth - Talk 18:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • The author is now a part-time faculty at an accredited seminary (see [3], I doubt this makes him an expert in the field, though. I just wanted to store this here for the moment, mostly. WilyD 19:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • The references to The Messenger are all now redundant. I've rereferenced Arthur's birth and death dates through Smith 1987, the second ref basically defines the role of an exhorter, which was superfluous to begin with, and the third merely backed up a reference from Smith '87. I've left them in, as I still hope to find some evidence The Messenger should be considered reliable, but I can remove them without loss if push comes to shove. WilyD 18:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • http://www.ontarioplaques.com/index.html
      • The text of the site is written and published by the government of Ontario's Ministry of Colleges and Universities, through the Archeological and Historic Sites Board. While the guy republishing it might be a little sketchy, I don't think this has to be a problem. I'm unaware that the government makes that text available online, to just cite the sign itself streaches verifiability, I think. WilyD 15:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ouch. Does the government have copyright on that text? Ealdgyth - Talk 15:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sign was put up in 1997 or 1998, so probably yes. I don't think it'd qualify as an "engraving". It's probably fair dealing on Alan Brown's part, given the usual copyright situation in Canada, but that's a long discussion and thought. I don't know practices for this. WilyD 16:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Oh, sorry, I had to go in the middle of typing that response. What I meant was, does the government have a publication that lists all the plaques? If so, you might list that. I misread it and thought that he was copying the whole website text from a government source, not just "reprinting" the plaque. How necessary IS this plaque to your article? I'm always leery of places that publish photos because we can't always be sure that the photo is correctly attributed to where/when it was taken. If there is no editorial oversight, it becomes difficult to be sure that the photo wasn't altered, etc. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • I also cite the Federal Government press release about the naming, and I could cite a provincial government agency that explicitly mentions the plaque was placed in '97, but as far as I can tell, Brown's website is the only one that contains the text of the plaque, which I think is quite nice for the reader. Now, I suppose I can't find a good way to demonstrate the plaque text hasn't been altered (and here, I don't specifically know, though I know he has reproduced all the ones I have checked correct (which is ~3)). I can leave it out, though I'm not sure that's not a disservice to the reader. WilyD 17:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                • How about we use the link to the photo in the External Links section, and cite the government sources in the article? External links don't have to be as reliable as sources, so you'd still be showing the plaque (which I agree is a service to the reader) without relying on it for anything in the sourcing. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Okay, I've done this, and added an explicit reference for the plaque going up. WilyD 18:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per the MOS, link titles in references shouldn't be in all capitals (current refs 4 and 14).
    • Okay. fixed. I was trying to remain true to the source. WilyD 15:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, but in this case, capitalization isn't something that has to be remained true to. As long as the title is correctly transcribed, we prefer not to do all caps so we dont look like we're shouting. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • JSTOR and other academic journal database links should state that they require a subscription in the reference.
    • This I have addressed. WilyD 16:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current ref 19, 23, 30, 44, 69, 70, 75, 76, 78. are lacking a last access date.
    • Although I don't see why the MOS dictates this, I've gone and done it anyhow. WilyD 17:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Mainly for two reasons. One, since websites can change their content (unlike printed books) you need to know what exact version was being referred to as a source, in case later the page changes. That's the main reason. The other reason is that if the link goes dead, you can know when to start searching the internet archives for archived versions. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Okay, I can buy the second point. But any halfway reliable website isn't going to be changing the text of a scanned book, I hope. WilyD 18:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, but your references are a special case. Most websites used as sources aren't based on printed works or scanned works. They are something like this which is subject to change and not based on a book. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Maybe it's not worth making an exception for a special case, but I only meant the "first published elsewhere" books/papers/whatever. WilyD 18:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise sources look okay, links check out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I HOPE to get back to this and do a full review shortly. It really looked very interesting from what I saw of the article in passing. Just really busy in RL and won't have time until later. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - Giggy. Sorry to see this has had minimal commentary...

  • His parents are named in the infobox, so I would name (and wikilink) them in the lead too.
    • Oh, I did this, too. WilyD 13:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and acting as a spokesman" - acting --> acted?
    • Yes, I meant acted, and it now says acted. WilyD 12:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't believe the lead makes mention of his death (other than a date in the first sentence). It probably should say something, even if it's as simple as adding a "... where he died in 1856" at its end.
    • I just added that. He was essential retired at this point, there are no real exciting details. WilyD 12:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. Giggy (talk) 11:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Augustus Jones is sometimes just referred to as Augustus (and somestimes by full name). Be consitent (apart from the first usage outside the lead, which should be full name, I'd just use Augustus everywhere else).
    • I feel very odd referring to his father as just "Augustus" everywhere. Typically, one does not refer to their fathers this way - I'm probably just being a kook, though. WilyD 13:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Case soon began to act as a mentor to Jones as a missionary" - the "as a... as a..." is a bit awkward.
    • I changed it a bit, for flow. I'm not known for flow when speaking, though, so I cannot promise the flow has actually improved. Rather, I'm known to ramble, and will continue talking until someone else has something to say. One time ... WilyD 13:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Looking at some more sections at random, the prose is really quite good. Very minor niggles. But in general it's pretty much there, for mine. Giggy (talk) 11:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support.Nice work on a not so well known person. Sumoeagle179 (talk) 01:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. Oppose by karanacs. I thought the article was very interesting and it certainly seemed comprehensive. I did have a few questions and I found some MOS issues that should be fixed. While I did a small copyedit, I think the article would benefit from a final good copyedit to smooth out the edges.

  • I removed a lot of wikilinks to ordinary words (like salmon) in the first half of the article. Please check the second half of the article (starting with First British tour) and do a similar culling.
    • There was a bunch of unneeded or duplicated ones. I'm very rambling and context-y when I talk to, so I'm unsure you'd find it sufficient. WilyD 13:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article initially makes it seem as if Sarah Tekarihogan was a white woman (it mentioned that polygamy not accepted by whites) but later it appears that she is Iroquois. That should probably be clarified at the beginning of the article.
    • Tekarihogan is a Mohawk woman, yes. I made it explicit that polygamy was an accepted practice among the Mohawks and Mississaugas. WilyD 14:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any information about how well Sarah and her children accepted Peter and his brother?
    • It's not discussed much. Peter was close to his sister Mary - others, to very levels. I've never seen much discussion about his relationship with his stepmother, but I get the impression it was unremarkable. WilyD 16:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There probably ought to be a citation for the statistic here: "In 1825, over half his band had converted to Christianity, and Jones decided to devote his life to missionary work."
    • The number is given both in Sacred Feathers and in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography. I went with overkill. WilyD 16:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't really see a need to subdivide the Ministry section so much. The section headers for "Conversion and Early Ministry" and "Chieftain and late rministry" could be removed, leaving just the lower level headers
    • This is entirely true. It's hindsight, it's very clear those section headings didn't add anything. WilyD 15:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not a complete sentence, and I wasn't entirely sure where you were going with it: " The Christian dress and style of Jones' band of converts, including their singing of hymns, which had been translated into Ojibwe by Jones. "
    • Not sure what happened, looks like the second part of the sentence got cutoff during a re-arrangement. I've completed it, anyhow. WilyD 16:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd move this sentence " At this meeting, about 50 of the approximately 200 Indians of Jones' band were converted. " further up in the paragraph. It would make more sense when discussing that Jones and Captain Jim each led a contingent to the meeting.
    • I added the numbers they each lead, which gives some context - it's in the reference already used for that section. I then moved the number converted up, I don't think I was thinking clearly about the temporal arrangement. WilyD 16:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the next year they were back when the Indian Department failed to pay the full annuity due the band over an 1818 land concession" - which year? The previous sentence mentioned both 1825 and 1829.
    • It's 1826, I made it more explicit. WilyD 16:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • All measurements in acres should also be converted to hectares
    • I added that nifty convert template, this is done. WilyD 17:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure what this means: "In 1827, Jones was received on trial for the Methodist itinerancy"<
    • Oh, he received a temporary License to Preach (Methodist) as a Circuit rider (religious). It's Methodist jargon. WilyD 17:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • This needs to be reworded - I grew up in the Methodist church and didn't know the term, so it's likely other readers will be confused. Karanacs (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh, okay. Having been reading historical sources it seemed like a perfectly natural expression to me, but I've reduced the jargon substantially, to "In 1827, Jones was granted a trial preaching license as an itinerant preacher". It conveys more or less the same, excepting maybe about his being part of a group of such people. That's not really the important part. WilyD 20:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At the same time they applied pressure to the Indian communities to abandon Methodism for Anglicanism" - if the brothers were not willing to leave Methodism for Anglicanism why did they begin to pressure the Indian communities to do so?
    • Oh, I see. "They" in the context is Strachan and the Upper Canada government officials, not the Joneses. I've clarified it. WilyD 17:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This likely needs a citation "Colbourne looked far more favourably on the Methodists, but still hoped to replace the influence of American Methodists with British Wesleyans."
    • This was covered in the previous sentence's citation. I've moved it down the paragraph. WilyD 14:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the caption for the portraits of Peter and Eliza, is this capitalization intended: "London Painter"?
    • There's no reason to capitalise painter, so I replaced "P" with "p". WilyD 13:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Returning to Upper Canada, that year's Methodist conference named Jones "A Missionary to the Indian Tribes" on Case's urging" - does this mean that the Methodist conference returned to Canada or that it happened after Jones returned to Canada?
    • Now reads: "After his return to Upper Canada, the year's annual Methodist conference named Jones "A Missionary to the Indian Tribes" on Case's urging." - The conference was just the official annual meetings for the Methodists in his district (Canada at this time, I think). WilyD 19:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he held more than sixty sermons and one hundred speeches " - I am not sure that is a proper verb - should it not be "he gave"?
    • I think I had originally used the term "lecture", but decided it was too jargon-y or archaic. Held is dispreferred by Google 20:1 vs. gave. Doesn't matter to me, so I changed it. WilyD 14:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any information on why his Indian name was used when he gave speeches instead of his English name?
    • The short of it is that it would draw much better crowds. In England in the 1830s and 40s, crowds would show up just to see an exotic Indian, far more so than a random preacher. I mention somewhere that he was unhappy people showed up for that reason, but he was raking in cash, these trips were netting 1/3 or more of the Canadian MEthodist Church's annual budgets. WilyD 19:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There should not be an "of" between a month and year (June 1831 not June of 1831)
    • I removed the instance of this. WilyD 13:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sometimes the article spells out Reverend and sometimes it uses an abbreviation. It should be consistent.
    • All uses are now spelt out in full, except those cases where they are a direct quotation (in memorials and references such examples exist). WilyD 13:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The British run church resulted in Jones' colleagues treating him like an inferior" - why? This does not make sense to me (and needs a hyphen)
    • Hyphen is resolved easily enough. I don't think anyone makes it totally clear why Jones dropped in the Church's priority scheme. A number of British Elders would've been moved into the Canadian Hierarchy. I think they bring in a different set of priorities (i.e. the white settlers, not the Indians) and probably some fairly plain racism, having known Indians primarily from third-hand stories and whatnot. The white settler population was expanding very rapidly at this time, it's fairly natural they wouldn't care as much about Indians as had previously been cared. But I don't think anyone discusses this explicitly. WilyD 20:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've reworded the sentence completely to: " The combined church was now run by the British, and Jones's influence lessened" - does that meet with the source information? It seemed to make a bit more sense to me this way. Karanacs (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't think this is quite strong enough, so I beefed it up. James Evans was assigned to do Ojibwe translations, including redo-ing some of Jones; The running of the Indian missions was given over to a guy who couldn't even talk to Indians. William Case was put in charge of translations, even though he couldn't speak Ojibwe. Jones didn't just lack influence, he was being passed over for jobs which were given to less qualified individuals. Accordingly, I've punched up the language. 14:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Are there sources for these facts? "The strain of these community splits, combined with Jones' responsibilities as a father after the birth of his first son, Charles Augustus (Wahweyaakuhmegoo "The Round World") in April 1839, prevented Jones from undertaking many proselytizing tours. As Eliza had previously had two miscarriages and two stillbirths, the couple took great care in raising Charles."
    • I added a citation. WilyD 21:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't use callout quotes per WP:MOSQUOTE
    • Huh. I switched it to the "quotation" template. WilyD 20:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to see some mention of Peter's son Peter in the article - the only mention I see is in the phot caption
    • I added a short mention of his birth and naming. Young Peter was only 13 when old Peter died - although he would go on to be a notable figure, not much happened before his father's death. WilyD 15:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Karanacs (talk) 03:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - A rare non-sports article review from me. I found this on the requested feedback template.

  • Typo in lead: "In 1847, Jones lead the band to relocate to New Credit on land donated by the Six Nations, who where able to furnish the Mississaugas with title deeds." Where should be were.
    • This is true, and has been corrected. WilyD 17:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early life: Raised by his mother: "Tuhbenahneequay. Tuhbenahneequay..." It's not good to have this kind of repetition, especially with such a long name.
    • I rearranged this to avoid that, and the later complaint that it wasn't clear Augustus Jones was a white guy. WilyD 17:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • English language isn't a needed link.
    • Okay, I'm torn over this. Most readers are probably somewhat familiar with English - it's history, it spread, blah blah blah. That English was the language of the settlers of Upper Canada is important, but plain. His command of English allowed him to make his trips to England and America, speak directly to Victoria and Edward IV, and so forth. Contextualising the role of English in this case may be important.
    • In short, I have a hard time justifying it, but I'd rather keep it. WilyD 14:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and a bunch of eagle feathers to denote its flight." I'm concerned that "a bunch of" may not be encyclopedic phrasing.
    • Bunch of is the phrase Peter used to describe them.[4]. While this may mimic the style of a modern slang usage, the formal English usage of the word bunch is the one employed here, I think - a group of several objects bundled together, i.e. Noun use 1, not noun use 4. WilyD 17:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During a long episode of drunken frolicking ofby all the adult Indians in Captain Jim's band..." Recommend that change.
    • This is more a more usual grammatic construction. I changed it. WilyD 17:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Double-check this one. Giants2008 (17-14) 00:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry, I must've had a stroke or something. It should be changed now, unless someone is playing pranks on me. WilyD 12:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Raised by his father: Another English language link. Also another Stoney Creek link, which isn't needed since there was one in the last section.
    • Okay, I removed these. WilyD 18:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His allowed himself to be baptised..."
    • And fixed this ... WilyD 18:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ministry: Conversion: Another Mississauga link is unnecessary here.
    • Yeah, I removed it. WilyD 18:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, it's not bad, but Karanacs was correct in saying a copy-edit would be beneficial. Giants2008 (17-14) 22:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose until a good copyedit has been done.

  • First paragraph of the lead, three of the sentences start with "His...", including the last two. Very repetative, consider varying them.
    • Easier done than said. Two are rearranged. WilyD 18:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I got lost. Was he Ojibwa, Mississauga or Mohawk? You say he was Ojibwa, but then "HIs band of Mississaugas..." which implies he was Mississauga ...
    • Err, The Mississaugas are/were a group within the Ojibwa. Maybe more like the Mississaugas were a political group within the ethnic cultural Ojibwa. His stepmother was a Mohawk, and he lived in the Mohawk community of the Six Nations for a while. WilyD 18:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then that should probably be made more obvious so that folks don't get lost like I did. I honestly did not know that information, and it should probably be in the article, not just in a wikilink. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I want to avoid labouring too hard on the point - I don't explain, for instance, that being an American of Welsh descent makes Jones a member of white Christian culture, and I'd rather not promote much of a double-standard. I slipped the phrase "Mississauga Ojibwa" into the lead to address this subtlely. WilyD 16:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably should mention somewhere that Augustus Jones was a white man? This might make the fact that folks considered Peter a bridge between the white and Indian worlds a bit more understandable.
    • I added an explicit reference to this and was a bit clearer about the polygamy. WilyD 17:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article definitely needs a copyedit. Very rough transitions between ideas and sentences, along with very choppy sentences and lots of redundancies. I'll try to point out the worst offenders, but understand these are not complete.
  • Why do we need to wikilink the English language? Or hunger, exposure to the cold, grandfather, eagle,
    • Grandfather was not very useful, I agree. I do think Hunger and exposure to cold add something - a reader might reasonably wonder about how severe hunger or cold exposure need to be to cripple someone like that - something they may not have experience with themselves. I'll think about the other two. WilyD 18:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm torn about whether Eagle adds much. Eagle totem is already link'd, so maybe just plain eagle is redundant. Eagle contains some discussion about the use of the eagle as a national or organisational symbol, which is probably tangentially relevent content. Still pondering English. WilyD 10:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Per above, I think I'd rather see a wikilink to English kept. I'm not sure I can justify it, but I do think it's possibly useful, and not possibly harmful. WilyD 14:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Raised by his mother.. last paragraph "During the War of 1812, Jones' band of Mississaugas experience a share of the hardship." What hardship? Of the war? Needs more explication.
    • Err, yes, hardship of the war. The rest of this paragraph seems to explain this better to me. Jones' grandmother dies, White John dies, refugees from the war occupy a lot of the band's hunting ground. I'm not sure how to be more explicit. Wouldn't "war's hardship" come off as redundant? WilyD 20:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I wouldn't find it redundant. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Alright - people are generally not great at reading their own writing, so I've added "war's" to make it clearer. WilyD 12:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Raised by his father section, "Head Chief Wabakinine, band spokesman Golden Eagle and Jones' grandfather Wahbanosay were all recently deceased." Err, very awkward, perhaps "... had all recently died." Or "(list of people) died in that year." which makes it active.
    • Re-reading the reference, it's seems that the timescales of their deaths is pretty long. With only 200 Mississaugas, of course, such deaths have far more impact then we'd normally be familiar with. The bigger problem for them is that no effective community leaders were taking their place. I've reworded to better reflect this. WilyD 10:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I got as far as Ministry, and decided I'll have to oppose until a good copyedit for prose flow has been done. The research seems very interesting, but the flow is so bad it doesn't keep my interest. That's usually a sign of prose needing tweaking. I don't think it's far from FA, it just needs a fresh set of eyes who is good at copyediting going over the article and massaging the text. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regretfully Oppose until a good copy edit can be done. For example:
  • "To honour Jones and underscoring.." underscore
  • to underscore, I think. I've changed it to that, anyhow. WilyD 11:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As well," Is "as well" a legitimate transition in British English? It certainly doesn't work for me in AmerEng.
  • I only speak hyper-Canadianised English, and As well is a legitimate transition there. Is Additionally preferable or such? Buddy was born in Burlington and died in Brantford - Canadian English seems appropriate. WilyD 13:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Jones was struck by illness in December 1855 during a wagon ride home from New Credit to Echo Villa. Jones was unable to shake it..." Unable to shake the wagon ride? Clarify referent.
  • Unable to shake the illness, Jones died in his home on June 29, 1856. WilyD 12:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Located west of Brantford, it allows him to be closer to New Credit" Should be "allowed." Also awkward phrasing.
  • The estate was close to the established town of Brantford, but also allowed him to be close to New Credit I think it hits the point more directed. WilyD 13:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "White squatters were driven off the land by about 1855, although continued theft of logs remained a problem for several years." I'm assuming the squatters stole the logs? Or did someone else?
  • Nominally I don't think this is known. Practically, it was probably the farmers from the adjacent lands who were doing this - both the squatters and the loggers reflect the problem the Mississaugas had in getting the white settlers to respect their title to the land. WilyD 13:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The brothers, while Christians, objected to the harsh discipline imposed on the young, the use of voting rather than consensus to govern and the loss of Indian lifestyle and culture." So Christians should be in favor of harsh discipline, consensus and loss of culture? "While" seems wrong.
  • I can't speak to should, but the Christians generally favoured much harsher discipline for the young (read:any discipline), voting (as opposed to traditional Mississauga government by consensus) and the replacement of Mississauga culture with European one (farming rather than hunting/gathering, monogamy rather than polygamy, and so forth), yes. WilyD 13:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this is easter-eggy at all. It's just an avoidance of jargon or unfamiliar terms. WilyD 16:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also in the first paragraph of "raised by his mother".... The clarity/coherence could use some work. The first sentence mentions Tuhbenahneequay, then we hear about immigrant... surveyor.. customs.. polygamy, then a later sentence refers to "lived with a Mississauga woman Tuhbenahneequay." The use of the indefinite article makes it seem as though this is the first mention of Tuhbenahneequay, but it isn't. Nearly every sentence should be reorganized.
  • I've reorganised the section, but ... I've reorganised it, and I think it addresses things much better now, actually. WilyD 14:06, 24 September 2008 (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/Peter_Jones_(missionary)/archive1&oldid=1141922818"