Talk:William Goddard (publisher)

Harv error?

@Doug Coldwell: — Aye Doug, haven't seen you around DYK in a while. In regards to this edit, I was just curious how the two sources in question, that were previously in 'cite book' format, posed any chance of a Harv Error, while the other sources in the Further reading section remain in 'cite book or 'cite journal' format. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: I have installed on my PC the "Harve Error Detection Tool" app that I obtained from the Help Desk years ago. I can not answer your question other than Hudak and Reese showed as Harve Errors in red letters on my PC. When I took them out, then no other Harve Errors showed. Recommend that you get this Harve Error Detection Tool from the Help Desk, that comes with instruction of installation. I have been real busy making Good Articles and now have 190. I am aiming for 200 by Christmas. Many of my latest Good Articles have been colonial printers. Gooddard could become a Good Article IF you submit GAN.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: — Well, since these sources don't pose any such problem in the actual article, I'd like to return them to their prior format because I want to maintain uniformity in the source listing, which happens to be a FA criteria, not that that matters much at this point. Anyway, I didn't realize your were a colonial printer buff also! Yes, I created the Goddard article back in 2010 and just recently have added other material, sources, etc, to it. Have just created the Early American publishers and printers article on Sept 22 (after building it in my sandbox for more than a week prior to that). While the article touches on 'printing' per se, its focus is on how colonial publishers (esp colonial newspapers) and printers effected colonial American politics and how these things were fundamental in publicly opposing colonial taxation, uniting the colonies, and bringing about the revolution. e.g. Patriots like Samuel Adams routinely wrote revolutionary literature in the various colonial newspapers in New England. I just submitted it to DYK a couple of days ago, yet it still needs a few topics better explained or expanded on. I'll look in on your GA nominations from time to time and offer any help if possible. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 23:28, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: Sure. Go ahead and put back those books into the prior format for uniformity. Yes, I am a lot into colonial printers and have these ILL books on my desk now for the Good Articles I am working on about colonial printers. My wife and I have visited Colonial Williamsburg many times and have been in the print shop several times. I have a few thousand pictures of Colonial Williamsburg. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: It so happens that several of the colonial printers listed under Other colonial printers are articles I created and am now upgrading to become Good Articles. My latest GA review has been on David Hall.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: I figured out why the other sources in the Further reading section didn't show up in the Harve Error detection. They have an extra parameter of "|ref=wolley1894" and similar. If you were to put that into the two you are going to put back, THEN it will not show up as a Harve Error.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: P.S. Still recommend that you get the Harve Error Detection Tool from the Help Desk - if you don't already have it. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: — Okay, thanks for the heads up on the 'ref=' link. I have, what I like to think is, an impressive collection of books in my library. Finding information on any given printer, with the exception of people like Benjamin Franklin, however, is a time consuming process. Most of the sources I've used for the William Goddard (publisher) and Early American publishers and printers articles I've found on-line -- usually at Jstor and archive.org. I've dug up a nice selection of journals from these sources, which as you must know, are more specific in their scope. You might find some additional useful sources in the Bibliography of the publishers and printers' article.
Re: Williamsburg. I'm impressed. I've been living in California for more than 30 years now, but I grew up in up-state (central) New York and I sort of kick myself in the head for not visiting all the historic sites that were near by, including Oriskany and Saratoga, Fort Ticonderoga, Fort Ontario, etc.
I'll check out the harv error detector. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: I lived in San Diego, Calfornia for 20 years. I was a real estate broker in the 1980s. You have e-mail.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Main article

[Note: this section was added to and then subsequently deleted from the weeks-since-completed first GA review page; it should have been on the article talk page to begin with, so I have resurrected it and placed it here after it was deleted by Gwillhickers.] BlueMoonset (talk) 17:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@SchreiberBike and Doug Coldwell: -- (Doug Coldwell has also been called in as he has been active in creating and contributing to many such articles.)  The main article link to Early American publishers and printers was at the top of this article but was moved to the See also section by user SchreiberBike, with the claim that the article in question is not the main article for William Goddard. My reasoning is that if we were going to write a book about Early American publishers and printers, William Goddard would be one chapter under that main title, as William Goddard was just one early American publisher and printer among many. The main article about Early American publishers and printers also offers background information and puts Goddard and other such printers in context with one another for the time period they lived in. I suppose I can live with the link in the See also section, but there it will often be overlooked, as a large percentage of readers only read the lede and maybe one or two particular sections of interest. With the link in question at the top as a main article, the linked article, which links to dozens of other printers and related subjects, will be read by far more readers than if it was simply listed at the bottom of the Goddard article. Imo, a main article link is appropriate and would also serve a number of useful purposes. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:28, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: I think I understand where you're coming from. Early American publishers and printers is important in understanding who William Goddard is and vital in understanding his place in the American history of publishers and printers. I think though that having Early American publishers and printers as the main article at the top of William Goddard's page (before even his name and dates) says that the link is more important than the text below to understanding William Goddard. I'm sure you don't think that, but I think it implies that. Less important, it also violates the instructions for the {{Main}} template:

• "This template is used after the heading of the summary, to link to the subtopic article that has been summarized." and
• "This template should also not be used in lead sections."

I'd seen that you'd added that template to several articles, but didn't want to revert you wholesale. Thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I think that as a reader I'd find that Main article tag at the top confusing. SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@SchreiberBike: — Many thanks for your prompt and well reasoned reply. Well, I guess one can't argue with policy. I was hoping there would be a better way to get the Early American publishers and printers article noticed other than to list it under 'See also'. Perhaps as a piped link in an appropriate phrase in the lede would help. I'll also start removing such links from the other articles. Thanks also for not going on a revert campaign. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William Goddard (publisher)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kaleeb18 (talk · contribs) 20:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello there, I'll be reviewing this article. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 20:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for review. I'll start working on the issues today.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Looks good to me ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:52, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Through his Pennsylvania Gazette and The Constitutional Courant he was – comma after Courant  Done Later Goddard's newspaper partnership with Benjamin Franklin in – comma after later  Done two years. His mother was Sarah Updike – there is an extra space before His  Done starting in 1755, and worked in his – no comma needed  Done A few months after his arrival he was given – comma after arrival  Done Then in 1762 a fire destroyed Farley's print shop – comma after then and 1762  Done fire destroyed Farley's print shop destroying most of his – comma before destroying. Also the word destroy is used twice, change it up  Done Goddard then opened his first printing – remove then  Done he then started The Providence Gazette and Country Journal, – remove then  Done As a newspaper printer and publisher Goddard subscribed – comma after publisher  Done However, his commitment to this ideal was – change this to the  Done publishing all the trash which every rancerous, illiberal, – its spelled rancorous  Done He then found a job with the New York City – then is not needed  Done After a couple of months he returned to Providence – comma after months  Done the verge of going out of business until Goddard – comma before until  Done "Sarah Goddard & Company" and the Stamp Act had been repealed – comma before and  Done Goddard then sent Samuel Inslee – say "Later, Goddard sent Samuel Inslee"  Done Then his friend John Carter, who – remove then  Done with the Goddards' family business – apostrophe goes before the s  Done Carter then assisted in printing the weekly newspaper until he – remove then and comma before until  Done He then became the successor of Goddard's – remove then  Done newspaper and started publishing it alone beginning with – comma before beginning  Done Goddard then opened a print shop in June 1766 in – remove then  Done soon dissolved over disagreements about debts and Goddard – comma before and  Done seventy-two-page pamphlet, The Partnership, in – no commas needed  Done In retaliation Galloway and Wharton – comma after retaliation  Done Baltimore's first newspapers, the Maryland Journal and Baltimore Advertiser – no comma needed  Done These newspapers were printed with the type obtained – change these to the  Done under her name, Mary Katherine Goddard – no comma needed  Done postmaster of Philadelphia from 1759 to 1775 when he – I think comma before when  Done post of surveyor in the system and his sister was – comma before and  Done Baltimore thereby making his own paper for the – remove thereby and add a comma after Baltimore  Done As revolutionary sentiments grew and the revolution with Britain drew closer Goddard's mother – comma after closer  Done operations at the Gazette for him when he – comma before when  Done Because of Franklin's rebellious political stances he was dismissed – comma after stances  Done Among the most outspoken was Goddard who – comma before who  Done They also were interfering with the delivery of newspapers which was – comma before which  Done to the Patriot cause and the British hindered – comma before and  Done Because of this Goddard decided to design – comma after this  Done He then brought into existence 28 – remove then  Done The Constitutional Post that would provide mail service – put a comma after Post and replace that with which  Done Known as Goddard's Post Offices it – comma after Offices  Done He ran the new mail service as a private concern, and so efficiently that the Continental Congress, on May 29, 1775, taking the first step, appointed a committee headed by Franklin and worked out its organization as an independent postal establishment and ultimately named it The Constitutional Post – long stringy sentence with too many ands  Done plan was ultimately implemented assuring communication – comma before assuring  Done Ultimately Goddard and his revolutionary post – comma after Ultimately  Done olonies by Christmas Day 1775 when – comma before when  Done when the Continental Congress authorized a post office run by the government it passed – comma after government  Done Franklin selected his son-in-law, Richard Bache – no comma needed  Done Deeply disappointed at being passed over again Goddard resigned – comma after again  Done Constitutional Post Office, and reminded the delegates – no comma needed  Done service which resulted in widespread protests among the colonists where Goddard – comma before where  Done involving his newspaper, the Pennsylvania Chronicle – no comma needed  Done put forth by Benjamin Franklin, and others, and so his – no comma before both ands. Also remove the second and  Done America, and so his – replace comma with a period and remove and so. Also is his talking about Franklin or Goddard  Done After the war Goddard became involved – comma after war  Done scrutiny of the Crown post who was opposed to Goddard – comma after post  Done So adamant was the Crown towards Goddard and the Chronicle that – comma before that  Done In 1773 the Pennsylvania Chronicle was – comma after 1773  Done was finally forced to go out of business – period after business  Done when the Crown Post refused to deliver the newspaper in the mail. Goddard – capitalize when and replace the period with a comma  Done Goddard defied the crown and circumvented these – capitalize crown  Done system and challenged the Crown post, and the – remove and. Put a comma after system. and change challenged to challenging  Done by creating the "Constitutional Post" which among – comma before which  Done I feel like the last paragraph in the section American Revolution has already been stated before  Done In the July 6, 1779 issue of the Maryland Journal Goddard – comma after 1779  Done the evening of July 8 at his home and demanded – comma after 8. remove and, and start a new sentence staring with they demanded  Done Eleazer Oswald to his side and insisted that – remove and, and start a new sentence starting with he insisted that  Done Overwhelmed and helpless Goddard agreed – comma after helpless  Done In the July 16 issue of the Maryland Journal they subsequently – comma after Journal  Done proposed title page on June 14 and later sent Washington – comma after 14  Done Lee's death and that he was taking care – remove that. place a comma before and  Done Washington, in a reply letter of June 11, 1785 to Goddard – comma after 1785  Done After Lee died he left Goddard – comma after died  Done Advertiser as the main editor while his sister's name – comma before while  Done head of the newspaper and his sister remained – comma before and  Done In 1803 he left Johnston for Providence – comma after 1803  Done so that his children might have – remove the word that  Done His son, William Giles Goddard, graduated from – no commas  Done Goddard in his retirement helped with – comma after retirement  Done Goddard's son, William Giles Goddard, wrote his – no commas  Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	per MOS:BIB sections named bibliography that are being used for the works cited are discouraged  Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecks for ref 2, 22, 38, 49, 65, are good, but ref 91 seems to link to nothing  Done
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	There is a 90% violation with the website https://bahasa.wiki/nn/William_Goddard_(publisher) (inappropriate) which is definitely copying from Wikipedia.  Done
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	the first paragraph in the section The Constitutional Post can be made smaller and combined with the second paragraph, as it says almost nothing about Goddard  Done
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	August 24, 1765, an extraordinary issue of the Gazette – extraordinary is not neutral  Done Goddard even published a seventy-two-page pamphlet – remove even  Done the principles of free speech that it was supposedly founded on – supposedly is not neutral  Done
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All are in the public domain
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	the lead image should have a caption saying Goddard circa 1780 and 1785  Done
	7. Overall assessment.

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)