Wikipedia:Peer review/Jane Cobden/archive1

Jane Cobden

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Jane Cobden was one of a group of strong-minded women who emerged in the late Victorian era – Millicent Fawcett, Emmeline Pankhurst, Beatrice Webb were others - to become influential, even dominating figures in early 20th century British politics. Cobden had probably less impact than the others because she spread herself thinly over many causes, and also because she eschewed grand, headline-grabbing gestures. In her time she championed women's suffrage, free trade, land reform, Irish independence, and the rights of indigenous peoples in South Africa and elsewhere. She was also a governor and benefactor of the LSE. For some reason she lacks a full-length biography, so information has been gleaned from many sources; comments welcomed on all aspects. Brianboulton (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

Just a few. Very interesting read, well done as usual.

Lede

• "in particular the securing of rights to aboriginal peoples in colonial territories" perhaps this can be phrased a little less legalistically?
• "but attacked the introduction of segregationist policies in South Africa after 1910." I'm not quite sure I get the "but"

Sisterhood

• "where she lived until her death in 1877" I don't think it's actually ambiguous, still you might want to check the use of female pronouns in this sentence.

• There might be a very slight technical ambiguity, but I don't see this as a problem. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• " and differences of outlook and opinion arose" Perhaps just "and differences opposed".

• Sorry, I can't make sense of this suggestion. Can you amplify? Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• Senior moment, I'm afraid. I just meant "and differences arose". I didn't feel that you need to say what the differences were, especially as the terms used are fairly vague. I think people will understand that a mother living in a house with young adult daughters may lead to disputes between them.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Perhaps a brief mention of how the sisterhood did these things would be good. Did they write to people?

• The sources are unhelpful. I imagine they wrote, met people, maybe attended meetings, but no specific details are given. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• I would make it clearer how Morley fit the bill, presumably because he was a professional writer.

• Again, I would have to use my own guesswork as to why they chose Morley. He was an established writer and journalist, perhaps they had met him in their promotions of Cobdenism – it's conjecture, really. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Early campaigns

• " After the failure of her marriage to Sickert" As the failure of the marriage has not yet been mentioned, possibly "After her marriage to Sickert failed"
• "On the problems caused by absentee landlordism in Ireland " I would delete this phrase. Cobden's quote speaks for itself.
• "revealed the extent of the British government's harshness in hounding the most vulnerable of individuals." possibly a bit dramatic.

LCC Election

• "she declined to do so" it's not clear what she declined to do, though I surmise she paid the fine as there is no mention of prison.
• I'm not sure I'd call that a quirk btw, perhaps "provision"?
• What did Cons do in the face of the ruling?

• Cons, like Cobden, paid the nominal fine. She was apparently more prepared than Jane to defy the law, but was persuaded otherwise. This information probably belongs in her article, though I could add a footnote here. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Edwardian

• "when she supported the WSPU's new magazine" Supported how?

• The sources simply say she "lent her support" to the Magazine, and likewise that she "supported" the Tax Resistance League – no details given. I have, however, adopted your next point and varied the phraseology. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• Watch overuse of "supported" here. Four times in two paragraphs.
• "Henry Campbell-Bannerman" I'd stick his customary handle of "Sir" on the front end.
• Given the fair amount of emphasis, perhaps a thumbnail of Joseph Chamberlain's views might be provided? Just a brief mention of Imperial Preference and tariffs outside the Empire, that kind of thing.
• "victims of the Black and Tans". Perhaps a slight rephrase would not be amiss?
• At some point, something should be said about how she was getting money to live on.

• Well, from 1892 she was married to a well-to-do publisher. Before that, I imagine she lived on a share of the Cobden family money – the aforementioned "Cobden Tribute Fund" had provided a very generous sum. However, the matter is not mentioned in the sources. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

That's all. I can't say I've ever run across her in my readings, though I've encountered her father. Still, always enjoy learning something new.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks: all good points which will have my attention later today. Brianboulton (talk) 09:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I have addressed the above points. As usual, no comment means I've adopted your suggestions. Many thanks for this help. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Ceranthor's Comments

Lead

• From her youth Jane Cobden was involved with her sisters in protecting and developing the legacy of her father. - I think it's just me, but I associate the phrase "involved with" with either criminals and organization/relief work. Either way I think it would be more direct as "From her youth Jane Cobden and her sisters protected and developed the legacy of their father".

• I have tweaked the wording to avoid the use of "involved with" Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Family...

• Jane's mother was Catherine Anne, née Williams, the daughter of a timber merchant from Machynlleth in Wales; her older siblings were Richard ("Dick"), born 1841; Kate, born 1844; and Ellen, born 1848. - The way this sentence is written with its pronoun arrangement makes the "her" before siblings somewhat ambiguous.

• Hmm...I think the pronoun is acceptable, despite a possible technical ambiguity. The alternative ("Jane's older siblings..." etc is awkward and repetitive. Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• Two further daughters followed Jane: Anne, born 1853, and Lucy, born in 1861.[1] - The two uses of born differ. Consistency would probably be better, either "born + year" or "born in year".
• He returned to the House of Commons in May 1859, as Liberal MP for Rochdale.[9] - Before you put a "the" in front of an MP title, so I think the should be used here too.

• Probably the initial use of "the" was wrong, as in those days most constituencies were multi-member. So he was not "the" MP for these places, just one of several. I have removed "the". Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• although his letters indicate that he felt warmly towards them and that he wished to direct their political education. - I actually Googled "felt warmly towards" because it was very foreign to me. It seems a bit awkward, but if you have used it before do not feel obligated to replace it.
• She and her younger sister Anne, at the ages of 12 and 10 respectively, taught classes in the local village school. - I think "at" would be better grammar than "in", though I suppose "in" also works fine. Just nitpicking with this comment.

Sisterhood

• The girls' formal education had to this point been intermittent, with periods of schooling being interspersed with governesses. - This sentence does not make an iota of sense to me as is. Could you explain so that my thick brain can comprehend? :D

• It means that their formal education, i.e. their attendance at schools, had often been interrupted by spells at home, under governesses. But the sentence adds little to the article,so I have removed it. Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• After their father's death Jane and Anne attended Warrington Lodge school in Maida Hill, but following an unspecified disagreement with the school both were removed, "thrown on my hands", their mother complained.[13] - Seems like this needs a grammar tweak. First of all I have no idea what an "unspecified disagreement" means, and I think that reads as though the reader is the person reading a historical book about their family and then saying that it is "unspecified" in that book. Perhaps an unknown or poorly-understood disagreement. Also, the part that follows "removed," seems like it should have a semicolon in front of it, and be rearranged to be "their mother complained they were thrown on my hands" or something similar. It may actually be fine as is for this second comment, I just have not seen anything similar in an encyclopedia article.

• An unspecified disagreement is a disagreement the nature of which has not been made clear. I think the sentence was plain enough, but in case others should share your confusion I have slightly reworded and repunctuated. Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• Together they stopped publication of a memoir of their father, sponsored by his former colleagues and complied by a family friend, Julie Salis Schwabe. - What does "complied by" mean? I think it means to say "compiled by", though I cannot be sure.

• Just a typo - well spotted. Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• This caused some offence; Schwabe had given the family financial and emotional support after Richard's death.[16][n 2] - I do not think a semicolon is necessary since the idea does not necessarily change from the first part to the second. I think a simply comma followed by an "as" or "because" would suffice to position the next statement.

• Either form is equally correct. The wording after a semicolon should add to or explain the main point made before the punctuation, which is the case here. A comma followed by "as" would work, too.

Women's suffrage

• Ellie became a novelist.[10] - This is the first mention of an Ellie rather than Ellen. Is this a typo or an unintroduced nickname?
• The National Society's general stance was cautious; it avoided close identification with political parties, and for this reason would not permit branches of the Women's Liberal Federation to affiliate.[22] - Affiliate with each other or with the entire society?

Ireland

• The attachment of Jane and her sisters to the rebellious factions in Ireland strained relations between the sisters and many of their father's former Liberal Unionist colleagues, but won approval from Thomas Bayley Potter, who had succeeded Richard Cobden as MP for Rochdale.[29] - Again "the" MP or just MP?

That's it for now. More will come later! ceranthor 19:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

These comments were very helpful and, except as commented, have been adopted. Thank you for your interest. Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

Another fine article. I'll need a couple of goes at it, with intervals for rest and refreshment. Part one:

• Lead
  • "A daughter of the Victorian reformer and statesman Richard Cobden, she was an early proponent of women's rights…" – you might like to check that the implied link between the first and second of these statements is strong enough to justify the yoking. I don't suggest it is in the class of our wonderful press's efforts ("a red-haired lay reader from Uxbridge, Smith first climbed the Eiger in 1966") but I just mention it.

• • I think that had he lived longer, or a little later, Richard Cobden's radicalism would have incorporated women's rights, hence Catherine's readiness to support the 1866 petition. So I reckon on balance that the link in my wording is justifiable. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• • "militant, extra-legal methods" – extra-legal? As in illegal?

• • Strangely, neither of my dictionaries recognise "extra-legal" as a word. I am humbled. "Illegal" it must be. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• • The full OED admits extra-legal, but not in quite the sense you mean: "extra-ˈlegal adj. beyond the province of law; not regulated by law. 1644 P. Hunton Vindic. Treat. Monarchy ix. 65 It concernes only..their Absolute, extra-legall Will; not their Authority. 1806 W. Taylor in Ann. Rev. 4 239 The extra-legal perpetuation of authority. 1871 E. A. Freeman Hist. Ess. 1st Ser. xii. 384 The word 'Government'..has come to be applied to this extra~legal body.1889 Spectator 12 Oct. 465/2 The legal and extra-legal expenditure..for election purposes." Tim riley (talk) 08:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• • You give her a "Jane" as well as a surname in paras 2 and 3. Looks fine to me, but the MoS disagrees, methinks.

• • You touch on one of the tricky issues with this article. MoS advocates that surnames be used in biographical articles, but in this case, for much of the first part of the article there are too many Cobdens around (father, mother, sisters) to describe Jane as "Cobden" without creating confusion for the general reader unaware of WP conventions. So I have largely used "Jane" in the early sections, switching to "Cobden" when the coast becomes clearer. On a couple of occasions, when it seemed appropriate, I have used "Jane Cobden". My main intent has been to ensure clarity for the reader; the principal biographical articles I have used (Richardson, Howe in ODNB) refer to her as "Jane" throughout. I hope that my compromise naming strategy is acceptable, but I would welcome any further comments or suggestions on this aspect. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC}

• • It works for me. I might omit the statement from the lead that she was known after marriage as Cobden Unwin, which is sure to have some clever clogs asking why she isn't so referred to in the relevant sections of the main text. Tim riley (talk) 08:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• • Good idea; the first sentence was too long, anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Family background and childhood
  • "who at the time of Jane's birth" – of her birth, perhaps?
  • "withdrawal from active public life" – better without the adjective, I think
• Sisterhood
  • "and works, and to" – the comma looks odd to me, but what do I know?
  • "although it would be several years" – this is the second "would be" rather than "was" construction so far. I never know quite what they add that the plain future tense doesn't. They feel woolly to me, but perhaps I'm missing a point, and I certainly don't press the matter.
  • "the 1866 "Ladies Petition" that Catherine Cobden had signed" – unless there was more than one of these I think the correct construction is "Ladies Petition", which Catherine Cobden had signed"" – the comma and "which" turning a defining clause into a descriptive one.

• • I have removed the words "that Catherine Cobden had signed", as there was only the one petition and it has already been stated that Catherine had signed it.

• Ireland
  • "In a letter to The Times, Jane and her associates cited one particular case—that of the Ryan family of Cloughbrady" – their letter ("The Administration of the Law in Ireland", Isabella Rowntree, Ellen Cobden Sickert and Jane Cobden, The Times, 27 October 1887, p. 6) spells the place as "Cloughbready".

• • Sources differ, but if it's Cloughbready in the letter, that's how it should be. Incidentally, if you can give me the full Times citation details I'll include them in the article. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• • That's the full citation. The URL is a waste of time as it takes you to Westminster Libraries' log in - a fat lot of good to most readers.

• • "the Catholic Church" – Roman Catholic, please: certain Anglicans get very exercised about this, as their Creed includes them as members of "one Catholic and Apostolic Church".

More anon. Tim riley (talk) 13:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks thus far; I await your further pleasure. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Second and final batch from Tim riley

Three supplementaries added to batch one above. Batch two:

• Marriage, wider interests
  • "she represented the WFL at the World Congress of Representative Women in Chicago" – for the avoidance of doubt, as the lawyers say, I think I'd reorder this as "she represented the WFL in Chicago at the World Congress of Representative Women." The phrase "Women in Chicago" momentarily catches the eye and breaks flow.
  • "an extended tract, "The Recent Development of Violence in our Midst"" – you have the title in quotes in the text but in italics in the notes.
• Social, political and humanitarian activities
  • "Cobden expressed confidence that "Manchester ... will tell Mr Chamberlain that it is still loyal"" – The reader will want to know if she was right (at least this reader did). I see that the electors of Manchester East threw Balfour out in 1906 and there wasn't a Tory MP in any of the city's six constituencies: List of MPs elected in the United Kingdom general election, 1906#M You may or may not think this worth mentioning in a footnote.
  • "The Cobdenite cause of land reform was revived in the 1900s as a major Liberal reform policy" – two reforms in one sentence
• Late campaigns
  • "Native's Land Act" – there seems to be some doubt whether the Act had an apostrophe at all (see, e.g. [1]) but those sources that give it an apostrophe give it as Natives' plural, not Native's singular.
• Final years, death and legacy
  • "Others were eventually collected, with other Cobden family … Otherwise" – too much of the other
  • "Jane Cobden died in her 97th year" – the Victorians used to go in for this formulation on tombstones, but I reckon "aged 96" is plainer.

Them's my few gleanings. I knew not of Jane Cobden before this, and I much enjoyed making her acquaintance. The only thing I should have liked to see and didn't is a pen portrait of her by a contemporary, but perhaps there isn't one. – Tim riley (talk) 08:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Further tweakings applied, including a couple of sentences (all I can find) that provide some sort of a portrait, though not, alas, from a contemporary. I am giving further thought to the question of a footnote on Manchester's loyalty in 1906; there were other factors than Free Trade which influenced the result of that election and how Manchester voted. Thanks for your time and suggestions, which undoubtedly improve the article. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Later: I am disinclined to add the footnote, having studied various histories. There were many issues that led to the Conservatives' heavy defeats in 1906; Manchester's results could have been influenced by these factors, rather than their merely staying loyal to the principles of free trade. If could find a history that said: "Manchester demonstrated its loyalty to the Free Trade principle by kicking out each of its five Conservative or Unionist members, including the prime minister, Balfour" - or words to that effect, then I'd be happy to add it. Brianboulton (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. No complaint from this quarter. Tim riley (talk) 14:13, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

More Ceranthor Comments

London County Council election 1889

• They formed the Society for Promoting the Return of Women as County Councillors (SPRWCC), - This implies that women could previously serve as councillors. If this is the case, then a little context might be helpful, though it is certainly not necessary.

• Why does it imply that? County Councils were created in 1888, and the Society was formed to promote the election of women to these new bodies. The word "return" in this sense simply means "election". Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• In court the judge ruled against both, - I think you should add "women" after both.
• Women did not receive the right to sit on county councils until 1907.[36][n 5] - Might be useful to mention what Act of law changed this fact. Also, I am not sure what relevancy note five has; could you explain?

• I have added the name of the legislation. As to the footnote, this is a bit of incidental information which might be of some interest to current Londoners, especially those who remember the destruction of the GLC by the Thatcher government. I see no harm in keeping it, but wouldn't weep tears if it were deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• In his account of the 1888–89 election, the historian Jonathan Schneer marks the campaign as a step in what he terms "working-class disenchantment with official Liberalism", citing in particular Lansbury's departure from the Liberal Party in 1892. - I really feel this sentence should have a citation after it seeing as it has a quote.

• All the information in this paragraph is cited to ref 32 (with 39 as a backup), but I agree it would be useful to pinpoint thr citation of the earlier quotation. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Final years, death and legacy

• Others were eventually collected, with other Cobden family documents, by the West Sussex County Council Record Office at Chichester.[2] - The commas setting off "with... documents" are unnecessary.

• The commas are optional; it's a matter of personal style. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• "Jane's activities showed that it was still possible to follow a radical agenda within the aegis of Liberalism". - Citation?

• In this case, the single citation at the paragraph's end suffices, as both quotes are part of the same summing-up by Richardson of Cobden's career. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Sources

• Jackson (2012). Morley of Blackburn: A Literary and Political Biography of John Morley. Plymouth: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. ISBN 978-1-61147-534-0. - I know of Fairleigh Dickinson, and it is not, as far as I am concerned, anywhere near Plymouth; I do not believe there is a Plymouth in NJ. The Google Books info page lists Rowman & Littlefield as the publisher. Could you clarify?

• Use the link in the bibliography, and go to the publication details pages of the book. You will see that it is published by Fairleigh Dickinson University Press of Plymouth in the UK. Rowman and Littlefield, of Lanham, Maryland, were the US publishers. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Generally a great article. ceranthor 22:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Again, thanks for the time that you have given to this review and for your helpful suggestions. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat.

A couple of minor copy edits for typos done: feel free to revert any or all with which you disagree. As always the following suggestions are very minor and possibly incorrect, but here goes:

Family background

• "born on 28 April 1851 at Westbourne Terrace": at seems the wrong preposition here without a house name or number.

Social, political and humanitarian activities

• The book dedication: "Free Trade in Land" should be in single, rather than double quotation mark.

A short list for yet another very pleasant and interesting read. - SchroCat (talk) 09:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Two small fixes made - thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 08:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)