Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Thomas S. Hinde/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thomas S. Hinde

Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article has had a substantial overhaul in the past few months, and just received an excellent copy-edit. The article is still ranked as start class and low importance, but it seems that those classifications no longer apply. The goal is to reach FA article status, and I would be grateful for any recommendations or nominations for this article. Thank you in advance. Thanks, Lawman4312 (talk) 02:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Before I even look through the article, I can see that it is at least C-class, probably B-class. If your goal is GA, you could just wait till it passes a review to change it, or you can change it yourself. As for the importance rating, it may always be low, at least in certain projects, no matter how good the article is. Don't worry about that so much. It just means the article is more loosely connected to the overall purpose of the specified project. It's not an indictment of the quality of the article or the primary author(s). Most of the articles I've gotten promoted are no more than "Mid" importance for my primary project, WikiProject Kentucky. Comments follow.

Images

[edit]

You may want to take some time to scan WP:IMAGES for guidelines on image use. Here are a couple of issues I see.

  • "It is often preferable to place images of faces so that the face or eyes look toward the text." This could be an issue on the Oliver Hazard Perry image and the Methodist circuit rider, and really does need fixing, imo, on the image of Dr. John Jacob Lescher. Usually, just changing the alignment from left to right is sufficient, although if it really throws off the image balance, (i.e. a bunch of images on one side or the other in a really short span) you might consider finding another image that faces the other way, removing an image, or possibly even reversing the image and uploading the new one to Commons, as long as it isn't materially misleading, as provided in WP:IMAGES.
  • There used to be a guideline that said not to start a section with a left-aligned image, but I can't find it now. It may have been deleted, but if not, you'll probably get comments about it viz a viz the images of Burr, Perry, the camp meeting, and Devil's Backbone. You can right-align where appropriate or drop the image down below the first paragraph in the section to address this.
  • Using the grave image as the infobox image is a little jarring to me. Since the lead mentions that there are no known portraits of him, I think it would be better to leave the infobox imageless. I have have gotten GAs passed without an image in the infobox.
  • The image of Aaron Burr is very tall. Consider adding the "upright" parameter in the image code.
    • Changed.
  • It would be helpful if the image of Harrison and Tecumseh had a fully completed {{Information}} template. I'm confident that it's PD, but the template would make that more clear. You might drop Kevin Myers (talk · contribs) a note about this. He's the original uploader, and I know he's still around here.
  • The image of Oliver Hazard Perry could also benefit from an {{Information}} template. It also needs a PD tag that is applicable in the U.S. ({{PD-art-life-70}} only applies in the EU and Australia.) Assuming the author information is correct in the Commons description, you should just be able to replace the extant tag with {{PD-old}}.
    • I tried to change this image, but there is no "edit" tab so I did not know how to add the {{PD-old}}.
  • Same issue with the image of Mount Carmel, Israel, although that one is tangential enough to the subject of this article that I'd probably just remove it altogether.
    • Changed
  • Same issue with the Methodist camp meeting. The LOC probably records the author's vital dates, but if not {{PD-1923}} is almost certainly applicable.
  • The Methodist circuit rider image should probably be re-uploaded with the text at the bottom clipped, but that shouldn't be a deal-breaker at GAC, at least. Might want it cleared up before going to FAC.
  • Same issue with the Grand Rivers Dam image.
    • Changed
      • Oops! I meant about the text needing to be lopped off. Sorry about that. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Do you mean the text below the image on the page?
          • No, I mean the lettering at the bottom of the image itself. On the Methodist circuit rider, it says "Going to Conference". On the Grand Rivers Dam, it says "Grand Rivers Dam, Wabash River, Mount Carmel, Ill." I think it's considered a good practice to crop those images so that they don't include those, if possible, since those captions may or may not fit the context of the article in which they are used. I'd just upload the cropped versions to Commons as derivative works. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The source for the image of John Jacob Lescher needs to be more clear. To claim {{PD-1923}}, you probably need to say where the image was published. Did it come from a book? If so, state the book at publication date at minimum. Also, I have a hard time believing such a crisp image was a self-portrait, yet you say the author is Lescher. It's OK to say "Unknown" for the author if we don't know.
    • Changed
      • OK, but we still don't know where it came from. Did you scan it from the original engraving? If so, where is the engraving housed? If not, who reprinted the copy that you scanned? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • It was in a private family collection.
          • OK. I assume there are markings on the original that indicate creation in 1875, then? Are there any other relevant markings on the original? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • It it not legible. Something like "G**** Pub Co. ****"
              • OK, but the 1875 date appears on it somewhere? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • Yes 1875 appears on the back.
                  • OK, I'd change the image description to say "Personal Steel Engraving of Dr. John Jacob Lescher. The original is dated 1875 on the back, although the name of the original publisher is illegible." The fact that a publisher was included with the date should suffice to establish that it was published at that time. Then, change the license tag to {{PD-1923}}, which establishes it as public domain in the U.S. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Changed.
  • There is insufficient information on the image of Edmund Hinde to determine whether it was published before 1923. If Harry Hinde made the photograph, it doesn't qualify under {{PD-old}}, since Harry Hinde didn't die until 1942. Can you provide a link to something that gives the copyright status of the Harry Hinde collection? Many times, a condition of the gift to a library is that the images are released into the public domain. Otherwise, we need to know where (and more relevantly, when) this image was published.
    • Changed
      • This still doesn't address the problem. If we don't know who the author is, how can we be sure he or she has been dead for at least 70 years? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • This was given to me by the Hinde family to put up on Wikipedia and they did not know who made the photograph.
          • OK, this will probably need to be submitted to Wikimedia Foundation. It's possible that the original author hasn't been dead for 100 years yet, but if it was in possession of the Hinde family, we can probably assume that the original author bequeathed the copyright to them. (At least, I'd be willing to accept that assumption personally. Can't speak for the folks that may review at FAC.) So, if we assume that the folks who lent it to you actually hold the copyright, they would have to agree to release the image under a free use license. For details on communicating that agreement to the the Wikimedia Foundation, see WP:IOWN. Alternatively, if you can show that the image was published prior to 1923, you can just add {{PD-1923}} and be done with it. Sorry to be such a pain about this, but you'd almost certainly run into it at FAC anyway. Might as well hear it now. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ok, for now I will list with {{PD-1923}} and will work on the WP:IOWN that you suggested for FAC.
  • Similar issue with the image of Charles Hinde. The author of that one is listed as Charles Hinde, which is nigh unto impossible, since he's depicted in the image.
  • The image of Kenton should be tagged as {{PD-old}} so it is clear that it is PD in the U.S.
    • Changed
      • Hmm. I'm seeing the death +70 template twice instead of the death +100 template I expected. Will look into this later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry I am not better with the images. I am still learning this area of Wikipedia.
          • Hmm. I see now that {{PD-old}} on Wikipedia is the template for "the author has been dead for 100 years" while on Commons it is the template for "the author has been dead for 70 years". Wonder who's wonderfully bone-headed idea that was. I fixed this one, and apologies for my bad advice. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
  • Per MOS:DOB, vital dates "are separated by an en dash (HTML code: –). When either date contains a space, the en dash is preceded by a space (preferably a non-breaking space, code:  ) and followed by a space."
  • "The Hinde family were" Should be "The Hinde family was" or "Members of the Hinde family were".
    • Changed
  • "Hinde publicly opposed slavery and played a role in Indian treaties, the conspiracy of Aaron Burr through his newspaper, The Fredonian, in Chillicothe, Ohio between 1806-1808, the War of 1812, the settlement of Illinois and Indiana, the advance of the Methodist church, the Madoc Tradition and was a noted historian and biographer." There is WAY too much information crammed into this sentence. It needs to be broken into multiple sentences.
    • Changed, split into two sentences.
  • "Hinde was a dedicated Methodist minister" The word "dedicated" here could be considered mildly POV here, unless it has a meaning akin to "ordained" in the Methodist church.
    • Changed completely agree.
  • "He was a pioneering circuit rider in the early 1800s." Where? In what states/communities?
    • Added the states.
  • "Hinde continued to write and publish religious articles until his death." Since I think this is the first mention of him writing and publishing religious articles, it doesn't mean much to say he "continued" to do so here.
    • Changed
  • Might provide some context for who Asbury is. (e.g. "Francis Asbury, one of the first two bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, considered...")
    • Changed by adding recommended context.
  • "Lyman Draper spent more than twenty years collecting documents by and about the Hinde family." I would move this sentence before the one that precedes it in the lead.
    • Changed.
  • After reading the lead, I still don't have a solid idea of who this person is or why he is important. Details like "he founded the town of Mount Carmel, Illinois" are good. Generalizations like "he opposed slavery" are less so. How did he oppose slavery? What effect did his opposition to slavery have on those around him? After reading the article, I'll have some better suggestions on how to improve the lead.

Early years

[edit]
  • Do we know what part of Virginia Hinde was born in?
    • Added Hanover County, Virginia
  • Capitalize "General" as a proper title.
    • Changed
  • "Not much is known about his early years" "Not much" strikes me as colloquial. "Little" might be a better substitute.
    • Changed
  • "moved from Virginia to Newport, Kentucky in 1797" Again, I cannot find the relevant guideline, but I always get flagged at PR and FAC for omitting the "second comma". In constructs like city/county, state or month date, year a comma follows the construct unless it terminates the sentence. Here, it would manifest itself as "moved from Virginia to Newport, Kentucky, in 1797". Note the "second comma" after "Kentucky". Not sure why this is the case, but apparently, it is. You might scan through and find other instances, because someone at FAC will almost certainly insist that you do.
  • "a 10,000 acre land grant" Use {{convert}} so that this also displays in square kilometers for our metric friends.
    • Changed, not sure if my change is correct?
  • "At this time Kentucky was still a violent place where attacks between settlers and Indians were commonplace." Is this relevant to something? Were any members of the Hinde family involved in violence with the Native Americans? If so, move it to the section that talks about that. If not, delete it. It really seems juxtaposed because the next sentence talks about Hinde fighting off a panther and a wolf, which could only be considered Native Americans in a very broad sense of the word! ;)
    • Completely agree -- changed.
  • "In a letter to James Madison on August 27, 1829" The date isn't that important here, and it throws off the chronology. Maybe just say "As an adult, Hinde wrote to James Madison that..." Also, this seems to be the first mention of Madison, so link him here.
    • Changed
  • "Hinde was educated in Kentucky" At home? In the common schools? At a university? Do we know?
    • This is interesting question-- there was a hint in one source that said his father Dr. Thomas Hinde educated him, but it was so general I did not feel comfortable stating. Also, another source said that Mr. Sneed the Clerk of Kentucky Court of Appeals educated Hinde. However, this was after his childhood so the generalized Kentucky was used. Not sure how to change.
      • I've run into similar situations. Assuming the source mentioning Dr. Hinde's education of his son is reliable, you can do something like "According to [whomever], Hinde's father educated him at home, although other sources do not mention this." Given your recent reorganization (which helps the flow of this article immensely, btw), I would now consider dropping "Hinde was educated in Kentucky" from the beginning of the second paragraph and just pick up with him going to work at the Superior Court. This works especially well if the aforementioned solution is used for his early education. Then, we just have that, while working for the court, he got some legal education from Mr. Sneed. Whether that was his only education or not isn't all that relevant. Such an apprenticeship (of sorts) wouldn't have been an uncommon arrangement in those days. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in 1801 he got a job clerking for the Superior Court of Kentucky" Not sure about the use of "clerk" as a verb here. Maybe change to "in 1801, he became clerk of the Superior Court of Kentucky". Also, I think that by 1801, the correct term was Kentucky Court of Appeals, which was the court of last resort in the state until 1975. If so, you should at least link it, even if you choose to retain the name as-is. You might also check to see if this was an elected office at the time. I know it was when Martha Layne Collins held it, but that was under the (present) 1891 constitution. Hinde would have held the job under the 1800 constitution.
  • "After four years, he left" "Left" seems colloquial. If "resigned" is appropriate, use that. If it was an elective office, though, it might be that his term expired and he didn't seek re-election or was defeated for re-election. That could be an important detail.
    • Changed
      • OK, it looks like you dropped mention of when and why he "left" the court altogether, which is OK if we don't know. Would be interesting to add the details if you run across them, though. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After Belinda died, Hinde married Sarah Neal Daugherty Cavileer." From the Family Tree section, I see we know at least Belinda's year of death and Hinde's date of marriage to Cavileer. Both should be included here.
    • Changed
  • "They had three children: Edmund C., Charles T. and Belinda." You might briefly state the noteworthiness of Edmund and Charles, since they both have their own articles.
    • Changed, but not sure if appropriate because they are both discussed in the lead.
  • When did Hinde leave Kentucky for Ohio? He was in Kentucky as clerk of the Superior Court as late as 1806, but by 1809, he was getting married in Ohio. Did he leave the state at the end of his tenure as court clerk? Having this information would help the narrative flow.
    • It is not exactly clear when he left. Based upon what I read it seems he was gone sometime between the end of 1806 and the beginning of 1807.

My little girl just woke up. More later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the above comments. I tried to go through and make all of the changes I could. Some of the suggestions for the text I need to research, so I will change that after I can get access to the necessary books. I tried to change the images like you suggested, but I am not sure if it is correct. If you have a chance I would greatly appreciate any further guidance. Lawman4312 (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition to slavery

[edit]
  • "Even though he grew up with slaves in his household, he and his siblings repudiated slavery on religious grounds." Later, we also learn that his mother opposed slavery, leaving us to believe that his father alone favored it. Do we know if this had any interesting consequences in terms of the family dynamic? Did the father join the family in denouncing slavery later in life? Did any of the children inherit the slaves, and if so, were they freed? Understandably, much of this may not be available. Just some suggestions for stuff to look for.
    • It is interesting that you mentioned this, because his father's will is online but not a reliable source. In the will he left slaves to his children but I did not add any information yet, because I was not able to get a reliable source or track down any of the slaves genealogy. I had hoped to get more information in the future.
      • You can safely mention the fact that he left the slaves to the children in his will and cite the will as a source. You can even quote from it, if you like. That's a perfectly valid use of a primary source. However, unless we know how the children, who apparently opposed slavery, dealt with this inheritance, it probably raises more questions than it answers. Good luck in finding out more about this; it would make a fantastic addition to the article. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His native state became so repugnant to him that he moved permanently to Ohio and started a political newspaper entitled The Fredonian." When did this happen? Was it this that caused him to leave his post as clerk of the Court of Appeals? Or did he lose the post and, freed of that responsibility, decide to move to Ohio? Did he start publishing newspapers before the move? This chronology issue suggests to me that you should merge this section with Early life for a more consistent read.
    • There is only the letter he wrote to President James Madison years later that discusses his feelings of slavery during the time, but no hard facts as to when it happened or if it caused him to leave the Court of Appeals. Wish there was more information.
  • "Before leaving Kentucky, Hinde joined other ministers in the abolitionist movement in Kentucky." If it happened before him leaving, then mention it before you mention him leaving. You can simplify the narrative that way.
    • Changed
  • The quote to Madison, while very relevant, is rather long, and interrupts the flow of the narrative. Can it be trimmed to only the most relevant details? If not, maybe consider floating it to one side or the other and just referencing it in the text.

Superior Court of Kentucky

[edit]
  • This short section should almost certainly be merged into Early life, since keeping it here requires us to backtrack into his time in Kentucky again. It also sheds some light on the education issue I mentioned earlier.
    • Sarnold17 already changed.
  • "Hinde also acquired a knowledge of the law and later transfered to the Superior Court." This raises the "Superior Court" vs. "Court of Appeals" issue again. I still think they are the same entity. Can you provide an excerpt from the source that talks about this "transfer"?
    • Sarnold17 already changed.
      • I'm still confused, though. Hinde was deputy clerk in the "Superior Court". Then, we have him being educated under Sneed in the clerk's office of the Court of Appeals. This could mean Sneed was clerk of a different but related court called the Court of Appeals, or it could mean that Sneed was clerk and Hinde deputy clerk of the Court of Appeals because it is the same court, given with two different names. I'd be inclined to accept this as the case, if not for the next part, which says Hinde soon transferred to the Superior Court. Not sure how that would happen unless they are talking about two different courts. Sorry to belabor this point, but it really is bugging me, considering how much work I've done on Kentucky political articles. It looks like all of this is cited to the same source. If it isn't too much trouble, could you quote the relevant section of that source here, since it's offline, so that I can try to make some sense of this? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I dropped the "transferred" part. As far as the Superior Court vs Court of Appeals issue -- I am not certain as how to answer the question. I just checked the online sources and it states Superior Court of Kentucky. If you think the Court of Appeals is proper I will change. I was only going by the source since I did not have relevant expertise.
          • Which source(s) contain this information? It looks like the whole paragraph is cited to Melba Porter Hay's compilation of Henry Clay's papers, but I found no mention of a Superior Court or Achilles Sneed in that source. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Well, the below online source uses the "Superior Court of Kentucky" as the name of the Court. This is the same source link I previously put, the reference is at the top of page 197. It is not descriptive, but states the name of the Court.

http://books.google.com/books?id=H2cOAAAAIAAJ&q=thomas+hinde#v=snippet&q=thomas%20hinde&f=false

Here is another source that again uses the name Superior Court, but is not descriptive:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Szs7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA43&lpg=PA43&dq=thomas+s+hinde+superior+court&source=bl&ots=tSEg3wGxQA&sig=kefDfkcr3Prd2Y0PtQgHToM_zVE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hGYEUOyBKoPc2gXxoYSfBQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=thomas%20s%20hinde%20superior%20court&f=false

Now I think you have made a good point, because as I was checking the next source, which was published by a nephew of Hinde it uses the Court of Appeals name with Sneed as Clerk.

http://books.google.com/books?id=U8gYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=thomas+s+hinde+sneed+kentucky&source=bl&ots=zc6MN-ywSl&sig=9XthvazHL6kJ5wL4lkIqINR4a3Y&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AGcEUMCwAai42wWy0cy0BQ&ved=0CEcQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=thomas%20s%20hinde%20sneed%20kentucky&f=false

This is interesting. Should we drop the Superior Court all together?

Yes, I think so. I don't doubt that "Superior Court of Kentucky" and "Kentucky Court of Appeals" were used interchangably at that time, but "Kentucky Court of Appeals" is the official name of the court, and it leaves less room for confusion with the Kentucky Supreme Court, which was created in 1975. Mainly, I wanted to see where the bit about him transferring from one court to the other came from as a way to check my understanding and make sure there wasn't another court of which I was not aware. I do know Sneed was the clerk of the Court of Appeals by 1825, at least, because of my work on Old Court-New Court controversy. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio House of Representatives:

  • "Hinde was elected by the Ohio House of Representatives to the position of clerk protempore" OK, so if I understand this correctly, the actual legislators elected him, not the population at large, right? Did he have to be an elected legislator himself to hold this position? If not, how did he come to the attention of the Ohio solons?
    • Sarnold17 already changed.
      • S/he moved the information, but didn't really elaborate on my concern, which was who elected him and how he got in their good graces enough to merit election. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, you were correct that the legislators elected him. He was not an elected legislator so I do not think it was necessary for the position. As far as how he got the attention of the Ohio solons, I can only speculate that it was from his connection in Kentucky, his newspaper, and possibly his family members-- but again that is only speculation.
  • "During the first election as clerk Hinde was unanimously elected." I can't properly parse this sentence. Please try to rephrase it.
    • Sarnold17 already changed.
  • "Hinde held the position for multiple terms" This doesn't tell us much. We don't know how long a term is, nor do we know exactly (or even approximately) how many he served? We don't even know what year he was elected or what year he stopped seeking re-election.
    • The only information I was able to get is through Google Books and it is very vague. I am in the process of trying to locate more information but it is not going well.
      • OK. One would think the term length and method of election might be available in the Ohio constitution for the relevant time period, if you can find it. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I agree with you, but he was not an elected legislator he was elected by the legislators to the position of clerk. I will try and find more information and hopefully can better elaborate soon.

Newspaper publisher

[edit]
  • "in partnership with R.D. Richardson edited and published a newspaper titled the Fredonian." How did he know Richardson? Did he have an agreement with him to work at the newspaper before leaving Kentucky? We are sort of left with the impression that he just aimlessly left Kentucky and plopped down in Chillicothe, Ohio, walked into a stranger's newspaper office, and started publishing the next day.
    • Changed. Richardson was his brother in law.
      • Ah, yes. This makes more sense now. One is also left to wonder if perhaps the brother-in-law was already in Ohio and this was the reason Hinde came there after leaving Kentucky. If you can find something stating that was the case, it would obviously make a good addition to the article. Also, here you say he came to Ohio "in 1806", where earlier you said "by 1806". Maybe you mean he began printing the newspaper in 1806. If so, that needs to be more clear. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have tried to get more information on Richardson, but it has not been successful. I will continue to look.
  • "The Fredonian repeatedly opposed the projects of Aaron Burr." What projects? A link to Burr conspiracy will almost certainly serve you well somewhere in the vicinity of this statement.
    • I did not want to overlink since the next section cover the Burr conspiracy
      • Not sure the Burr thing needs its own section. You could just merge it with this one, which avoids repetition. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I will delete section heading for Burr Conspiracy.
          • That helps. Would also delete "The Fredonian repeatedly opposed the projects of Aaron Burr," and move the next two paragraphs in its place. Then, the bit about his conversion to Methodism and retirement from the newspaper business would comprise a short paragraph at the end of the section. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Changed reworded the published information critical...
  • "The following year he converted to Methodism" From? Atheism? Buddhism? Some other Christian denomination?
  • "Hinde engaged in locating military lands and in land jobbing" I assume "locating" is synonymous with "surveying" in this context. I have no idea what "land jobbing" is. You either need a wiki-link or some further elaboration.
    • Changed. I did not know the meaning of "jobbing" when I first read it. Essentially, I think it is speculation in real estate. I added link to speculation to help clarify.
      • That helps. Any reason not to just change it to land speculating, which is a more widely-understood term, in my experience?Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, I thought about just changing to Land Speculation, but since that was the term used during the time I thought it gave some historical flavor to the article. I can change if problematic.

Aaron Burr conspiracy

[edit]
  • Again, why does this have its own section, necessitating that the narrative return to earlier events? Just merge it into the "Newspaper publisher" section.
  • "He collected evidence" I understand that the evidence disappeared, but do we know what the nature of the evidence was?
    • No specifics the source did not provide details just that he sent him evidence or papers and they disappeared.
      • OK. Who called it "evidence", then? That could be a pretty subjective term. One man's evidence is another man's coincidence. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • It was not directly called evidence, but there was a pretty detailed description of the affair. Below is a link to the online source if you are interested. See page 197

http://books.google.com/books?id=H2cOAAAAIAAJ&q=thomas+hinde#v=snippet&q=thomas%20hinde&f=false

          • This makes it sound like it wasn't so much "evidence" but copies of stuff he had previously published in the newspaper. Those seem vastly different to me. You might say that he published information critical of Burr in the Fredonian and sent copies of the published articles to Henry Clay. Something to that effect communicates what happened more clearly. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Changed deleted evidence and reworded.
  • "Henry Clay, secretary of state" Careful. Clay wasn't Secretary of State until nearly two decades after Burr's acquittal. He was, however, Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives around this same time.
    • I used Secretary of State because it was the highest office Clay held during his life. This was already changed.
      • I don't see that it was changed. I think it would be most correct to use the title he had at the time. You could add a parenthetical about him later becoming Secretary of State if you think it is relevant here. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed
  • "suspiciously the papers disappeared" If you are going to say the disappearance was "suspicious", you need to credibly assert why. Otherwise, it is a POV concern.
    • The source used the word "suspiciously."
      • Sources that old aren't always known for their neutrality. I still think you should drop "suspiciously". Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed
          • I double checked the source, and it used the word "unaccountably disappeared" so I was wrong about "suspiciously.
  • "relationship with the sixth Governor of Kentucky George Madison" Careful again. Madison wasn't governor until almost a decade later, and he only served in that office for three weeks before dying. Probably better to call him State Auditor, which was his office at the time. You can add "afterward governor" or something of that ilk if you think it's that important to note.
    • As with Clay, I used the title of Governor because it was the highest office he held during his life. I will change.
  • "With their encouragement, in 1829 Hinde wrote to their relation President James Madison" Hmm. Since George Madison died in 1816, it is curious to say that he influenced Hinde to write to President Madison in 1829.
    • In the letter to President James Madison Hinde stated his close relationship with Madison family as a reason why he wrote the former president.
      • So it may have been his familiarity with the Madisons that encouraged him to write to James Madison, not necessarily direct encouragement from the family members mentioned? If that's right, you might look for a way to communicate that without implying that poor George was providing encouragement 13 years after his death. ;) Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed.
  • Was this letter to Madison still regarding the Burr incident. It isn't entirely clear what his writing a political history has to do with Burr, nor is it clear why he solicited copies of the Fredonian.
    • Yes, the letter was about the Burr incident. Hinde heard from an unnamed source that President Madison was writing a history, but Madison in his response letter denied the rumour. In the response Madison requested Hinde to send he evidence of the Burr conspiracy.
      • OK, maybe reword something like this: "In 1829 Hinde wrote to their relation President James Madison to provide him with information about the Burr conspiracy for inclusion in a political history Hinde had heard Madison was writing. In response, Madison denied the project, but nevertheless asked Hinde to send copies of The Fredonian to include in his papers." If we know that those issues of the paper specifically concerned Burr, we might work that in as well. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed
  • "Hinde's information may have come from personal exposure to Burr or his close sympathizers. It is known that after Burr left the vice presidency in 1805 that he traveled extensively through the Ohio River Valley. Either in Chillicothe or during his travels as a Methodist circuit rider Hinde and Burr could have met, although no documents support this." Most of this is speculation. Can it be attributed to someone qualified to speculation upon such things?
    • Based on Burr's Wikipedia page, the links in locations and time were connected between both Hinde and Burr. If you think this should be cut I will follow, but I included because it seemed plausible and was not outrageous speculation.
      • I don't deny that it's plausible, but it still constitutes original research unless the speculations were made by a qualified individual in a reliable source. That's the (sometimes unfortunate) nature of Wikipedia. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Should I delete that information?
          • Yes. Unfortunately, original research is not allowed on Wikipedia, even if it is highly plausible. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Changed. Maybe in the future I will come across something that will allow me to add this material.
              • I added some new information and changed some small details of this section.
  • "He was later tried and acquitted by Chief Justice John Marshall." Marshall presided over the trial, but Burr was acquitted by a jury.
    • Changed

Indian affairs

[edit]
  • "the general lawlessness common at the time" Is this still talking about the Indians, or about the frontier in general? If it is the latter, how is it relevant to this section?
    • Changed. Deleted irrelevant part.
  • Not quite seeing the connection between the Indian mounds and Hinde's opposition to slavery, which the quote seems to be trying to relate. Can you elaborate?
    • Was trying to demonstrate the respect Hinde placed for Native American culture by using a Indian mound site to relay his deepest convictions on the social issues of time period. If not agreeable it can be deleted.
  • I would endorse the "citation needed" tag on Hinde's motivation for buying land in Illinois. This kind of speculation needs a qualified speculator to be relevant.
    • Deleted.
  • Do we know any details surrounding the circumstances of Hinde's first meeting with Tecumseh?
    • No, the source only states he met Tecumseh and does not provide details. However, given his prior employment in the Court of Appeals and the Ohio House of Representatives he was probably taking depositions and recording the official proceedings.
  • Do we know why Hinde was present at a meeting between Harrison and Tecumseh? The article gives us no real sense of the purpose of these meetings.
    • See above explanation.
  • "The Vinncenes meeting would have been" Just say, "The Vincennes meeting was". Since there is some uncertainty, you might include who thinks it was one of these two instances.
    • changed
  • Do we know any details about the meeting with Blue Jacket? When was it? Was he literally just sitting down for an interview for the local paper or what?
    • Book does not state details. There are letters in the Wisconsin Historical Society in the Thomas S. Hinde collection that discuss this, but have not had a chance to study them yet.
  • "One source states that" Who is this source? What critical role did Hinde play in the treaty negotiations?
    • See footnote 11. It does not go into detail, it just says he played critical role.
  • "In 1813, Hinde was placed in charge of prisoners captured at the Battle of Lake Erie." This really sticks out when located here because the reader is wondering how a newspaper publisher turned amateur Indian anthropologist ended up in charge of military prisoners. I glanced ahead to see that he apparently also served in the War of 1812. It is vital that his war service precede this information to avoid jarring the reader.
  • "Many of the prisoners would have come from Tecumseh’s army." Again, just say "Many of the prisoners came from Tecumseh's army." Also, this sentence is uncited.
    • Changed. The Indians and the British fought the War of 1812 this is very standard information. I will try and get a reliable textbook and cite here.

War of 1812

[edit]
  • There are some details I would have expected to see here that I don't. When did Hinde enlist? What was his rank upon entry? Did he receive any notable promotions? When did he leave the army? If he was in charge of prisoners, he surely held a reasonably high rank.
    • Actually, this is strange point of history. There are numerous sources that state he was in the War of 1812 and that he was in charge of prisoners but none state any other details. Even the Ross County Ohio Historical Society records do not clearly state his rank.
  • "His participation was motivated by his association with Harrison, who was then the Governor of the Indiana Territory located in Vincennes near Mount Carmel. Both Hinde and Harrison originated from well-known Virginian families and were close in age." This information about his friendship with Harrison should probably come earlier in the narrative. You notice I had several questions about why he seemed to be where Harrison; this partially answers some of those. Also, I get that they were both from prominent Virginia families and close in age, but what do Vincennes and Mount Carmel have to do with anything? The only previous mention of Vincennes is that Hinde was (for some reason) there with Harrison around 1810. Mount Carmel has not even been mentioned yet, although I notice that it is a heading further down the article.
    • Mount Carmel was a town Hinde founded near Vincennes. Since Harrison was Governor of the Indiana Territory at this time their friendship would have greatly helped Hinde with his land speculation.
  • "At Lake Erie, Hinde would have served under American commander Captain Oliver Hazard Perry" Again, "Hinde served under..." Unless there is some doubt about that. Also, why was Hinde, an Army soldier, serving under Perry, a Navy officer?
    • Again, this is another strange point. The source only stated Hinde was in charge of prisoners at Lake Erie under Perry, it does not state rank or military branch.
  • "Commander Perry's decisive victory" Although he was commander of U.S. forces, I think it's proper to call him by his rank, which was "captain".
    • Changed
  • Everything after the first sentence in the second paragraph has little, if anything, to do with Hinde. Better to move the bit about his charge over the prisoners here instead.
    • Changed

Going to have to take another break here. This article seems to need more work than I first imagined, particularly in terms of organizing it logically. I'll try to get back with more comments soon. If you want to respond to individual comments in-line, just break below the relevant comment and write your responses there. I'll try to go back and strike things that I feel have been sufficiently addressed soon. That will show you what issues are still outstanding. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments are extremely helpful. I am still in the process of getting some of the sources and reviewing them. As I review the material I will continue to hash out more details to the issues you raised above. Sorry for the delay have been very busy lately. Also, Sarnold17 is helping out with this project. Thank you again for your help. This article is going to be iron clad soon! Lawman4312 (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I struck a bunch of resolved issues, but my browser crashed with them. I'll try to restore them. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:19, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can see you are very committed to improving the article and have taken my comments as ways to further do so, rather than pedantic nitpicks. In some PRs, they tend to come across more as the latter! Will try to finish the review soon. I've been busier than anticipated lately, too. We can move it to the talk page if the PR closes before we're done. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to go back through and fix more of the unresolved comments. The images I am having a difficult time with and would appreciate any help. Hopefully I can get more details to some of the outstanding issues soon. Thank you so much for your detailed review. The quality of the article will be dramatically better once we finish. Lawman4312 (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, I've provided an assist where I can on the image deal. It really is a pain to get these things right. I've been through several discussions about image use at FAC, and I'm speaking primarily from that standpoint rather than a standpoint of personal concern about the copyright status of the images. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to raise one issue that I have struggled with for this article. Currently, I am using the writer infobox for Hinde, but technically he would qualify as an officeholder or just a regular biography. Is there a way to combine the officeholder and writer infoboxes? Lawman4312 (talk) 22:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I haven't finished the article yet, so it's hard for me to say what he's best known for. That's frequently a challenge with infoboxes, which is why some people don't like them at all. I don't fall into that camp; I try to use whatever is most appropriate. Let me get back to you about this when I finish the article. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Real estate

[edit]
  • "After the death of his father, Hinde inherited property." There are several things that could make this sentence more informative, including what year his father died, where the inherited property was, how much it was, did he inherit all or just part of his father's property? Not sure if we know any of these things, but as it stands, this is a rather vanilla sentence.
    • Changed. I added 1828, the year Thomas Hinde died, and the what Hinde inherited by the will.
      • This definitely makes a better sentence, but it also raises the issue of what he did with the slave, given his emancipationist views. If we could clear this up, it would help a lot. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • All that I know is the slave's name was Ira. I have not been able to uncover anything more that is why I did not want to elaborate until I had more information.
  • "Several of his Ohio property disputes reached the Supreme Court of the United States." Example case names? Did these cases set any important precedents?
  • "his three year clerkship with the Ohio House of Representatives" The length of his service as clerk should be in that section, not this one.
  • "His earlier legal experience in Kentucky and his three year clerkship with the Ohio House of Representatives likely helped him in court." Whose opinion is this?
    • Changed. Could not find the source.
  • "He donated a portion of these tracts to form the city of Mount Carmel." We've been talking about him in Ohio, but if I understand correctly, this city is in Illinois. At minimum, you should include the state here. You might also talk about how he ended up with land in Illinois when he's primarily operating in Ohio, if we know.
    • Changed. Added Illinois. At this time, many treaties with the Indians had been concluded by William Henry Harrison and military lands were being sold. Land Speculators like Hinde went to purchase these lands even though he claimed it was for religious purposes. There is not a clear source that states that information.
  • "Hinde also knew Associate Justice Thomas Todd from Hinde's time at the Kentucky Court while Todd was a prominent judge there." You can probably simplify this by saying that "Hinde also knew Associate Justice Thomas Todd, who was a justice on the Kentucky Court of Appeals when Hinde served as the court's clerk."
    • Changed.
  • Is it significant that Hinde knew the one of the litigants and two of the judges in Johnson v. M'Intosh? Did he influence the decision in some way?
    • Well, this was a substantial case that had a huge impact on land rights. Hinde would have greatly benefited from the ruling, and among the Hinde documents in the Lyman Draper collection there are many letters that discuss the sale of lands with William M'Intosh who was a litigant in the case.
      • OK, the article should probably focus on how this ruling benefitted Hinde. While it is interesting that Hinde knew M'Intosh, Marshall, and Todd, including this without saying what impact it had on the case could raise the question of whether he tried to influence the ruling, especially since he apparently benefitted from it. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. I added one sentence at the end saying he benefited from the ruling.
          • That's definitely helping, but it's still a little unclear. What I think it is saying is that Johnson v. M'Intosh somehow clarified a land dispute between whites like Hinde and M'Intosh and the Native Americans. We still don't know what the dispute was about or how the ruling settled it, but we do know that clearing it up benefitted Hinde. We're left to assume from the phrase "Due to the favorable ruling in the case" that the ruling was more to Hinde and M'Intosh's liking than to the Indians', but we don't know why. If you can clear up these issues, it will help. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Changed. I added more content that tries to better explain the Court's ruling. Essentially, M'Intosh and Hinde benefited because Johnson, the plaintiff, land purchased were illegal since he purchased them directly from the Native Americans, while M'Intosh's were legal since he bought them from the federal government, i.e., William Henry Harrison at Vincennes.
              • Ah, it is becoming quite clear now. Nice work. Still have a few minor niggles. The article says M'Intosh and Hinde lived near the Grand Rivers Dam. Since the dam's construction hasn't been mentioned yet, would it be accurate to say the live "near what would become the site of the Grand Rivers Dam" or perhaps less complicated, simply that they lived near each other? Next, a bit about what the "Discovery Doctrine" is would be helpful. Also, it stands to reason but is not explicitly stated that M'Intosh and Johnson were claiming the same land in the case. That probably should be said. Finally, it is implied that Hinde had land that would also have been covered by the ruling's precedent (i.e. that he bought from the federal government but that someone else claimed to have bought from the Indians). If that's the case, we should say that. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • Changed. I tried to address the issues above. Let me know if anything else is needed.
  • "He founded a number of towns and companies in the area." The number and/or names of these cities and companies would be helpful.
    • These are mentioned in the next section. Should I insert them here or leave it be?
      • This may be another of those issues that would be solved by maintaining a strict chronological presentation of events. If the towns and companies are described later, however, you might just be able to drop this sentence. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. I reworded, rearranged, and added more information. I think this resolves this issue and also helps with the previous Johnson v. M'Intosh issue.
          • Adding the bit about Mt. Carmel helps, but we don't learn about Powhatan and Selima until later, and the article never explicitly states that Hinde founded Selima. Were these the only settlements he founded? Were Powhaten and Selima also founded on land that was involved in the Johnson v. M'Intosh case? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Yes, I think that Mount Carmel, Powhaten, and Selima were the only settlements he founded based on the information currently available to me. Since he was a Methodist Circuit Rider who traveled extensively it is possible there are other settlements he founded or contributed to, but based on the information currently available I have not seen any evidence. Yes, Selima and Powhaten were part of the property involved in the Johnson v. M'Intosh case.
              • OK, let's change "After the ruling had settled ownership issues between the Indians and settlers Hinde founded a number of towns and companies in the Illinois territory." to read "After the ruling had settled ownership issues between the Indians and settlers Hinde founded the towns of Powhaten and Selima in the Illinois territory." The Wabash Navigation Company seems to be his only company of note, so we can drop the mention of companies and focus on Powhaten and Selima so we have some context for them when they appear later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • Changed.
  • Do we know any more of the specifics about the dispute between Hinde and Vattier? What was the name of the Supreme Court case?
    • Hinde v. Vattier I added the name of the case at the beginning of the section.'
      • But we don't know any more about the details than "Vattier had tried to fraudulently take title to a piece of property in Cincinnati that the Hinde family owned"? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. Good call on this one. I added more information. Is this clearer now?
          • Much, although I'd still like some elaboration on how "Vattier took title to the property illegally and claimed he owned the land." Did he physically steal the title? If so, how, and from where/whom? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Changed. I reviewed the Supreme Court case again and it states that through a series of legal moves was able to get title illegally. I tried to add information that better clarifies this point. If you think this needs more clarification let me know.

Founding Mount Carmel

[edit]
  • The caption under the picture should indicate that Market Street is in Mount Carmel, Illinois.
    • Changed
  • "Hinde, William McDowell and William Beauchamp collectively founded the city of Mount Carmel." In what year?
    • Changed. 1817
  • "It is generally thought that Hinde resided in a house located on the "bluff" in Mount Carmel." By whom?
    • Changed. One local history from 1883 stated he lived in a house on the bluff. However, in letters to Congress in the 1820's Hinde stated he lived near the Grand Rapids Dam, so he likely moved to town as he aged.
      • Your revision almost eliminates this issue. I would just add more details, like "According to a local history published in 1883, it is thought that Hinde resided in a house located on the "bluff" in Mount Carmel, although in his letters to Congress written in the 1820s, Hinde stated that he resided near the Grand Rapids Dam." That tells us that there is some uncertainty without speculating as to why. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. Thanks.

Creation of Wabash County

[edit]
  • "On December 24, 1824 the Illinois Legislature resolved the dispute by creating Wabash County from the eastern half of Edwards County." Presumably, this refers to the dispute over the location of the county seat. The intervening elections raise the possibility that one of them was disputed and this sentence refers to that instead. Suggest adding clarification and leaving events in chronological order.

Selima and Powhaten:

  • "Hinde owned more than 1,200 acres of land around the dam." Presumably, the land was around the proposed site of the dam, since the letter was in support of constructing it. Also, add the {{convert}} template here to convert to square kilometers.
  • Are the towns of Selima and Powhaten still extant?
    • No the towns no longer exist, and in fact their exact location is still not known.
      • Were they founded by Hinde? Why are they important? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes the towns were founded by Hinde, and Lescher. Based on one source, it seems that Selima was founded by Hinde, Lescher, and William M'Intosh from the Supreme Court Case earlier in the article. M'Intosh also lived near by the area where Selima was located. Towns are important because they helped get the Grand Rapids Dam project approved by both the Illinois and Indiana legislatures, and because it is not common for a person to found a town. Moreover, even though Powhaten no longer exists at one time it had a large population of people for the time period it existed. Plus, Hinde's original house near the Grand Rapids Dam would have been located in Powhaten.

Methodist minister

[edit]
  • This is all really interesting information and is among the best-written prose in the article so far. I think it works better chronologically, though, which means merging it into previous sections. Otherwise, we have to backtrack over two decades starting here. Let's work on doing that before I continue the review. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 02:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which sections do you think should be merged?
      • I've moved information around extensively to make it chronological (as much as is possible). Feel free to discuss or undo any of that movement. To me, the article makes much more sense this way. See what you think. Sorry I didn't discuss this first, but the edits were so extensive, I didn't feel like I could effectively narrate them. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • No worries. I completely understand. The organization is something I have struggled with because Hinde for a large portion of his life was literally all over the place--preaching, investing in real estate, and conducting business. The only thing I would point is that the sections for "Real Estate" and "Founding Mount Carmel" need to be considered. By chronology, the real estates disputes occurred first, but they took such a long time to resolve that they were still ongoing after he founded and settled in Mount Carmel. Therefore, it is difficult to determine which section should go first. What do you think?
          • I had similar problems with James Guthrie, who was always in the middle of several business and political endeavors. I think we should leave the organization as-is, since we can wrap up the "Founding Mount Carmel" section in a matter of a year or two. Backtracking a little here won't hurt as much as doing it decades at a time, as it was before. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • I agree.

Madoc tradition

[edit]

OK, I finished the rest of the article, so my comments from here on out will be with an eye toward all of the content.

  • We need a short description of what, exactly, the Madoc tradition is. I didn't know, and had to click through and read the lead of that article before coming back to this one.
    • Changed.
  • Very little of this section directly relates to Hinde. I'd keep the bit about his personal investigations and interviews and John Sevier's alleged confirmation of his six soldiers story and drop the rest. That probably wouldn't allow for it to remain its own section, but unless he made some meaningful contribution to the tradition's acceptance or made some new discovery related to it, that's probably OK. I'd just fold it into the discussion of his writings in the later life section.
  • Did Hinde originate the story about the six soldiers, or did he discover its existence and promote it?
    • Well, it is possible that the story originated with Hinde, but Sevier's account was first in terms of written documentation. Given the time, and the fact that the men had similar friends it hard to say without having more evidence.
  • This tradition strikes me, frankly, as a little nutty. That's OK, because then it dovetails nicely with the idea that he also subscribed to the Hollow Earth theory in the later life section. I think that's a great place to move it to, with an introductory sentence something like, "In his later writings, Hinde espoused some questionable theories such as the Hollow Earth theory and the Madoc tradition."
    • Changed.

Wabash Navigation Company

[edit]
  • The section formerly titled "Powhaten and Selima", which now follows the Charles Vattier section without a heading, should probably be incorporated into this section instead.
    • Changed.
      • Because of the dates on the letters, consider moving the paragraph about Lescher's letter immediately before the one about Hinde's. This also precludes the need for "The dam was built next to land Hinde owned." at the end of the first paragraph. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Dr. John Lescher was a business partner and friend of Thomas S. Hinde. Both men invested in the Wabash Navigation Company and Lescher later joined Hinde's children in a lawsuit against the company." Unless Lescher is notable for something in his own right, maybe just save this information for the third paragraph of this section.
    • Changed. Good Idea.
  • The last paragraph belongs in an article about the company, not Hinde, since he had been dead almost half a century before any of it occurred, and none of it seems to relate directly to him.
    • Do you think it is possible to keep it based on the fact that the original work done on the dam by Hinde and others was not substantial and caused more money to be spent later?
      • I missed that fact on the first read through. Consider changing "According to an annual report to the Secretary of War in 1908, the original lock and dam were "...not of a substantial character....," and "...rapidly deteriorated and became useless."" to "According to an annual report to the Secretary of War in 1908, the original lock and dam built by Hinde and his fellow investors were "...not of a substantial character....," and "...rapidly deteriorated and became useless."" That might have kept me from missing it. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed.

Family

[edit]

I'm thinking this section needs to be spread across the various extant sections and eliminated as a stand alone section. Specifically:

  • The "Later life and death" section could be re-titled "Later life and legacy". You could then move the bit about Charles Hinde and his son there, following Thomas S. Hinde's death. Because part of it involves the settlements that Hinde started, it is part of his legacy.
  • Mention the trivia about John M. Hinde's name near where you mention his birth.
  • Mention the bit about Bradford when you mention that he was the father of Hinde's wife Belinda.
    • Changed.
      • You could shorten this up a little. Change "Bradford was a descendant of William Bradford and was killed in the battle known as St. Clair's Defeat by Little Turtle and his followers. His tomb is located in Fort Recovery." to "Bradford was a descendant of William Bradford, was killed in St. Clair's Defeat, and buried in Fort Recovery." The bit about Little Turtle isn't important here; folks who are interested can click through to St. Clair's Defeat. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed
  • Eliminate the family tree.
    • Changed.
    • Mention that Hinde was the seventh of eight children in the "Early life" section.
      • Changed.
    • Mention the notable brother-in-law (Richard Southgate) and nephews (William Wright Southgate and William Taylor) near the beginning of the Early life section. Also mention briefly why they are notable.
      • Changed.
    • On the first mention of William Kavanaugh (which relates to his placing Hinde under the care of Achilles Sneed, mention that he was the first husband of Hinde's sister, Hannah.
      • Changed. By the way, I did a quick google search of Achilles Sneed and it seems he would make an interesting Wikipedia article.
        • I would shorten this up "Family member William Kavanaugh, who was the husband of Hinde's older sister Hannah, put him under the care of Achilles Sneed" by saying "William Kavanaugh, the husband of Hinde's older sister Hannah, put him under the care of Achilles Sneed" Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Regarding Sneed, I wondered if there would be enough out there to do an article on him. Could be worth a try, based on the coolness of his name alone! If you decide to try, let me know, and I'll try to contribute. If I one day decide to try it myself, I'll try to remember to drop you a line. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Changed. If I can get enough information I will let you.
    • Integrate any relevant details about Hinde's wives and their marriages in the appropriate place in the narrative.
    • Mention the notable sons-in-law, Charles H. Constable and Jacob Zimmerman, near the births of their wives.
      • Changed.
    • The notable children have been sufficiently covered already. Notable grandchildren are most likely to fit nicely in the "Later life and legacy" section.
      • Changed.

Later life and death

[edit]
  • As mentioned earlier, I suggest changing this to "Later life and legacy".
    • Changed.
  • Details of Hinde's death and burial should immediately follow "During his later years, he shared much of this information with various writers and publications." The care of the minor children should follow that as a new paragraph.
  • "The rod iron fence surrounding their graves" Should this be "wrought iron fence"?
    • Changed.
  • I find it inexplicable why the sections "Visit to the eastern United States" and "Late publications" follow Hinde's death in the article, since they detail things he did while still alive. Integrate them logically and chronologically into this section.
    • Changed.
      • I would eliminate the section heading for "Late publications" and plop all of the content in this section down right after "During his later years, he shared much of this information with various writers and publications." Start a new paragraph with "In his later writings, Hinde espoused some questionable theories such as the Hollow Earth theory and the Madoc tradition." (Drop "In fact".) Then drop in the Madoc Tradition section, eliminating the heading. I've already mentioned a suggested move for the part regarding his grandchildren. Might also drop the heading for "Visit to the eastern United States" and just let this paragraph flow to that section uninterrupted. I don't think any of those sections really necessitate their own headings, but you're free to disagree with that, of course. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. Looks much better.

Draper Manuscripts Collection

[edit]
  • This should be integrated late in the previous section as part of Hinde's legacy.
  • The second paragraph is not terribly relevant without some context as to how prominently and why these individuals are mentioned in the collection. I'd drop it altogether.
    • If I add some more detail can this section be saved?
      • Parts of it, maybe. I have a hard time believing you could find enough information to save every name on the list, and if you find very much detail, those details might warrant mention within the narrative of his life, not as part of this section. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • That is good point. I will delete the paragraph, but use the names to research and expand the article to prepare for FA review assuming GA review goes well.

After becoming wary of this article early in the review, I actually found it more satisfying than expected once I finished it. Once our work is finished here, I think it should have a fighting chance at GAC, at least, and maybe at FAC, too. Some of the gaps (like the relevant details of his service in the War of 1812) may lead to someone failing it on grounds of broadness, though, even if those details aren't available in reliable sources. Some articles just don't have enough supporting materials to ever bring them to GA status. (See Alney McLean and Edward Rumsey for two of my disappointments.) I think it'll be worth a try after we finish, though. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 16:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

      • Thank you so much for all of your comments and help. By the way, I was able to get a very rough drawing of Hinde by one of his children. Do you think I should insert that into the info box instead of the gravestone? It is a very rough drawing.
        • It would at least be worth uploading to Commons, even if we may not use it here. Also, its existence seems to challenge the assertion from the article that "No photographs or portraits of Hinde are currently known even though he posed for photographs, paintings and sketches during his life." I would think even this rough portrait might qualify, although I haven't seen it yet. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • I added. I am really curious to hear your opinion.
            • Whoo, that is a doozy, isn't it? My opinion may not prove to be the majority opinion, but I still like it better than the tombstone in the infobox. It needs a caption explaining why we used such a crazy picture, though. Something like "A rough sketch of Thomas Hinde done by his son. It is the only known portrait of him in existence." The relevant sentence in the lead would also need to be changed to reflect this. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Changed. I added caption. Yeap it is a doozy. I was surprised to find it last week in the library. Hopefully something better eventually emerges. Does this finish the review?
                • For the most part. You have acknowledged and are working on a few issues that remain open, but those aren't likely to be finished in the near-term. I would still change this sentence in light of having found the infobox portrait: "No photographs or portraits of Hinde are currently known even though he posed for photographs, and paintings during his life." Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Changed. Deleted sentence.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Thomas_S._Hinde/archive2&oldid=505717801"