Talk:Jonathan Elliot (publisher)

Jonathan Elliot (publisher) has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: April 4, 2024. (Reviewed version).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Venezuela Low‑importance

	Venezuela portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VenezuelaWikipedia:WikiProject VenezuelaTemplate:WikiProject VenezuelaVenezuela
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: North America / South America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	South American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

A fact from Jonathan Elliot (publisher) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 May 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that John Quincy Adams described Jonathan Elliot, his former printer, as "penurious and venal"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jonathan Elliot (publisher).

Wikipedia

GA Review

Passed. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jonathan Elliot (publisher)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 22:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Elli (talk · contribs) 00:32, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

I'll review this soon. Nothing immediate I can see that would justify a quickfail. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:32, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also, you should probably histmerge this with Jonathan Elliot (historian) (you'll need to get an admin for that). Elli (talk | contribs) 00:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

He enlisted within the United States Army upon his return, although likely did not see combat due to a lack of major campaigns during his period of service. I don't think the sources state this strongly enough? Would prefer something like upon his return, with the intent of serving in the War of 1812, though it is unclear whether he saw combat.
- That's a better phrasing, added. Ty! - G

News publications

First sentence is a comma splice (or I guess could be read as otherwise? but in any case is awkward).
- Fixed. - G
I'd go with phrasing like heavily championed Georgia senator William H. Crawford's campaign for the Democratic-Republican nomination in the 1816 United States presidential election (also link the Democratic-Republican party)
- Good idea, fixed. - G

History publications

Is Debates notable? In any case, I'd flesh out your description a bit more here -- also, the relevant part of Powell is more than just p689 so you should check the page range on that.
In general I think this section could probably be expanded to a few paragraphs.

Personal life and death

Not sure if the names of some of his kids are noteworthy, assuming they aren't notable in any way?
- Fair point. -G
Maybe try to dig up the obituaries cited here, or other newspapers from the time, to see if there's any more details on him? Though yeah I'd imagine they'd be pretty sparse.
- Added a little bit of info from his only obituary. - G

Images

File:Report of 1800 cover.JPG is certainly PD (maybe should be moved to Commons but that's not in the scope of GA)

Lead

Lead should probably be split into two paragraphs. I'd mention a bit more about the impact of his publications here.
- Done. -G
Infobox should estimate his age at death (using {{Death date and age}}).
- Fixed! - G

Overall

Article looks quite good; just a few things that need to be addressed. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Elli: Okay, I think I fixed it all up! - G
- @Elli: driveby failed ping (didn't use a full sig) ^Queenof_Hearts 05:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  ope, right. forgot that was needed Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Your changes here look good and have addressed all of my concerns. Passing. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 23:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... ~~that John Quincy Adams described Jonathan Elliot as "penurious and venal"?~~ Source: Hutson, James H. (November 1986). "The Creation of the Constitution: The Integrity of the Documentary Record". Texas Law Review. 65 (1). p. 13
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Non-combatant Casualty Value, Template:Did you know nominations/Tomás Treviño de Sobremonte

Improved to Good Article status by Generalissima (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 36 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I have absolutely no idea what either of those words mean. I think you should propose a different hook.--Laun chba ller 10:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Launchballer: fair enough I guess. ALT 1: ... that John Quincy Adams denounced his former printer, Jonathan Elliot? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Short enough, I guess interesting to an American audience (although I, as an Englishman, haven't heard of either of them), and sourced... to [6], the third of the references for that sentence, although I'm not quite sure how you get ACLS from Johnson, Allen; Malone, Dumas, eds. (1931). Dictionary of American Biography. Vol. 6. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Full review needed.--Laun chba ller 20:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was written by the American Council of Learned Societies. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article should make that clear.--Laun chba ller 21:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair's fair, fixed. 21:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Full review needed.--Laun chba ller 21:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I shall review this. ~~Please be patient, though, as there is currently very slow broadband in my village, and I may be temporarily cut off.~~ Storye book (talk) 16:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Thank you for this jolly good article - written in beautiful, elegant English, worthy of Henry James, I might say.

The ALT0 hook would be fine if it made clear who the victim of the insult is - otherwise it's just one one random bloke insulting another random bloke. Could you please insert his trade in front of his name, e.g. "newspaperman Jonathan Elliot" or whatever? Newspapermen get challenged all the time for being brave challengers of the status quo, or just mouthy - which is what makes them interesting. And there is nothing wrong with the words "penurious" and "venal" - they are jolly good insults (try them on your mum next time she wants to borrow your allowance back cos she's skint). It would weaken the hook to rephrase them - this is not Simple Wikipedia.
Hook fact is borne out, next to the fact in the article, by the online Dictionary of National Biography.

~~When this issue is resolved,~~ this would be good to go, with either hook. Storye book (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Storye book: Thank you for your kind words! I'm a little bit confused, do you think the ALT1 needs further expansion? Since I think that's ultimately the stronger hook here. If an internationalisation is needed, we can just rephrase it to President John Quincy Adams. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. I am cheering on ALT0 for its witty insult, and I am suggesting that we further identify Eliot (as the article's subject, and the subject of the insult) as a newspaperman in ALT0. I am not interested in improving ALT1 further, though you are welcome to do so if you wish. I don't think we need to further identify Adams, because it would distract from our hero Eliot. Just my opinion. Storye book (talk) 20:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think going with ALT1 as the hook would be best then. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that a typo, or do you really mean ALT1? ALT1 is by far the weaker hook, because "denounced" is boring, whereas "penurious and venal" is very funny and very sad, and reflects on the speaker, rather than on the victim of the insult. "Penurious" as commonly used in those days, meant being in the habit of having no money whatsoever, due to stupidity, laziness, bad luck, gullibility to fraudsters and all the rest of it: basically a loser. "Venal" as used in that era tended to mean constantly having one's mind on money, being greedy for money, and acting in a money-grasping manner. The combination of those words could of course be directed at a feckless and greedy person, but was more commonly directed at the poor and the starving, i.e. those who were not a financial success, and consequently were not the epitome of the American Dream. But the combination could also imply a suspicion of miserliness and corruption, i.e. pretending to be poor and asking too-high prices or demanding large bribes. So the insult "penurious and venal" could also be used by someone who grudged paying their bills, i.e. they were actually penurious and venal themselves, haha. Either way, like most insults, it reflects badly on the speaker, and not really on the victim.

So: (a) If you still insist on ALT1, I shall defer to your opinion as the nomintor, and I'll give the green tick - but with misgivings. Or: (b) If the above is a typo, and you really want ALT0, then please put some kind of indication of trade before Eliot's name in ALT0 and I'll give the green tick with a choice of either hook for the promoter. Storye book (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Storye book: I guess the ridiculousness of the phrasing is a bit funny—you've convinced me. ALT0a: ... that John Quincy Adams described Jonathan Elliot, his former printer, as "penurious and venal"? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 14:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Generalissima.
Good to go, with ALT 0a or 1. We have agreed preference for ALT0a. Storye book (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]