Talk:William Winstanley Hull

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the William Winstanley Hull article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

William Winstanley Hull has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion 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: March 4, 2024. (Reviewed version).

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 articles

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	William Winstanley Hull is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from William Winstanley Hull appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 February 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that William Winstanley Hull's search for the original manuscript of the 1662 prayer book led to its later discovery?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Winstanley Hull.

Wikipedia

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 20:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that William Winstanley Hull's search for the original manuscript of the 1662 prayer book is credited with leading to its discovery? Source: Greenhill, W. A.; Matthew, H. C. G. "Hull, William Winstanley". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/14111. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Euan Duthie, Lord Duthie

Created by Pbritti (talk). Self-nominated at 17:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/William Winstanley Hull; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

Review underway... Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 10:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Started in a sandbox on 12th January, moved to mainspace the following day and nominated immediately. >4KB of readable prose, and rated correctly at B-class. High-quality sourcing used from subject-matter experts and ODNB, which I have checked using my online access. Everything is cited correctly and accurately. No issues with close paraphrasing/copyvio. Hook fact is clearly stated in the ODNB biography and is suitably interesting. Perhaps the circumstances of the manuscript's discovery could be added to A.P. Stanley's article. QPQ review has been done.

@Pbritti: Thank you for (another) article about an interesting character. Verified and ready to go. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 11:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. sawyer * he/they * talk 00:20, 4 March 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:William Winstanley Hull/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sawyer-mcdonell (talk · contribs) 19:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Sawyer-mcdonell: just a heads up that this next week (Monday 4 March—Friday 8 March) is one where I'll be working extended shifts of 9 AM to 10 PM Eastern Time (US). As such, there's a high likelihood that my responses will be delayed. I should still have opportunities to respond to any comments and I'll still have access to the sources in question, though. Thanks again for launching the review! ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! sawyer * he/they * talk 19:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

Well-written

the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct Passed
it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
- Comment: I think I'd split the "biography" section into "early life", "career", and "personal life and death". Having a list of works would be helpful as well, and would fill out the article nicely!

Verifiable with no original research

it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline Passed
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)
- Comment: no major concerns, especially as there are fewer than 10 sources. Text-source integrity with the sources I could access is good. Are the Jasper 1954 & Bradshaw 1971 sources online at all?
it contains no original research Passed
it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism Passed

Broad in its coverage

it addresses the main aspects of the topic
- Comment: In certain respects a high tory and ultra-protestant, Hull joined Sir Robert Inglis's committee formed in 1829 to oppose the return of Robert Peel as MP for Oxford University, and a pamphlet he wrote in 1829 opposed the admission of Roman Catholics or Jews to parliament. (from the Oxford National Biography) - I think this could be a good thing to add; it gives more context to his views on liturgy, and it's an interesting contrast with his later defense of William George Ward. I think note 3 could be moved to the body of the text.
it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style) Passed

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each Passed

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute Passed

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio

media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content Passed
media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions Passed
- Comment: I wish there was a portrait or something of him, but alas I couldn't find anything on Commons or elsewhere. The picture of Brasenose is a nice touch!

@Pbritti I've finished my initial review; this is one of the fastest GAN reviews I've done because the article is quite short and concise, which is pleasant. I've got a few suggestions before I formally pass it. Excellent work! sawyer * he/they * talk 20:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sawyer-mcdonell: Wow, you move fast! I know it's a short one, but I'm still impressed. Ok, to your comments:

Regarding links to Jasper 1954 and Bradshaw 1971, I found Jasper. However, no one has uploaded Bradshaw as far as I am aware; I ended up shelling out an embarrassing amount for my copy two years ago so I'm more than willing to share the relevant page if needed (it's only about three paragraphs with one or two extended quotations from the proposed ordination rite).
I opposed the reorganization of the article when another BOLDly did it a bit ago, but it would seem I'm outvoted on it–all for the best! I'll do that shortly.
I'll add the 1829 parliamentary committee and opposition to Toleration in, as you're right in that they definitely add to the coverage. I'll also move note three to the body.
The lack of illustration has been annoying me, too. According to a New Zealand library (yes, I know that's out of left field), there's a possible caricature of him from a newspaper cartoon. However, the Hull depicted is more likely his father, John Hull (physician). In any case, the image hasn't been digitized at a high enough resolution.

Thanks again for the prompt review. Expect the GAN comments to produce results shortly! ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, done working through the comments! ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely! (Since you're busy this week I figured I might as well do the review today, as I'm doing the GAN review drive & have a bunch of other article reviews lined up.) I was mainly just curious about the offline sources, since they seem like the kind of thing that would be difficult to find; I've used a lot of offline sources (via local library) for some other projects. The article looks excellent now; congrats!! sawyer * he/they * talk 00:16, 4 March 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.