Talk:William Parks (publisher)

Sources difficult to locate

@Doug Coldwell: Hi Doug, as you know I've been adding various details to the article. At times I'm unable to locate a book on google or at archive.org. For example the Mellan and Gooch works can't be located, by me at least. When they're listed at OpenLibrary or Amazon it's of no use to me. You once mentioned that you had a number of actual works in your library, and I was hoping you could list the ones found in our bibliography here. The biography of Parks, written by William Gooch, is of particular interest to me. Is this the same Gooch as Sir William Gooch, 1st Baronet? If so it would seem then that this (primary?) source would be the first biography of Parks ever written(?) -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Gwillhickers: Thanks for the great improvements on the article. I see this article as a Good Article and it will get promoted quickly after the minor issues from the reviewer are done. Yup, the Mellen book IS NOT on-line. I used an actual hard copy of the book from the library. It so happens that the state I am from has an Inter-Library Loan system called Mel. All these examples are books I used in the past of this ILL system and are my pictures. The book you are talking about came from Central Michigan University which is 200 miles from where I live. I ordered it ILL and it arrived at my local library. I used it and gave it back to my library when done and then they sent it back to the University. I personally do not have any books on anything. I get all my hard copy books through my library and the Mel ILL system. Now it so happens that the state of Michigan is very big on education and all the Universities and colleges are full of reference books. I just order the book through the ILL system. It's like having access to the Library of Congress. Maybe your state of California has a similar ILL system. If all else fails ask your local library if they will order it from the Library of Congress. The LoC will loan the book IF your library will pay for the shipping of the book back and forth. It so happens that my library does that for me from time to time, when I can not get the book in Michigan. Sometimes my library just buys the book for me and keep it in their inventory. Or you could ask the Library of Congress to scan in the pages of interest from the book (or any book) and they will send it to you in a PDF. I do it all the time.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• @Gwillhickers: Worldcat shows "Gooch, William (1926). William Parks. William Parks Club" to be in several California libraries. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• Yes, I've ordered various books from the Calif. public library at times. I'll ask, but if they have to pay the shipping from and to the LoC for a given work they're likely to decline such a request. But who knows? It won't hurt to ask. Do you know if there's any connection to speak of between Parks and Gooch that it made him write a biography on Parks? I think we can assume this is the first biography of Parks(?) Gooch spent many years in Virginia and died one year after Parks did, so we know they lived in the same general place and time period. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• @Gwillhickers: Yes, an ILL within California probably will work for you to get the book. Where are you located in California? I notice that the image you are using is a painting done at Rome for Nicholas Brown, so that means the painter's name is unknown. Now likely the painter died BEFORE 1890 because it had to have been painted before 1814 (death of John Carter). So 1890 minus 1814 is 76, so then the painter had to be over 24 years old at the time he did the painting for Nicholas Brown as 1890 makes the painter 100 years old (if 24). So 1890 plus the time of 70 years after the death of the painter is sometime sooner than 1960. That makes the painting public domain.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: Thanks for catching that -- Yes Carter's Grandson, Nicholas, lived in a much different time period. I edited the DYK Template review talk to this effect.
I'm still trying to nail down Parks' involvement with Gooch and his (apparent first) biography of Parks. Is this one of the books you ordered before? Would be interesting to know what prompted Gooch into writing it. I live in LA County (very big county area wise) in the high desert in the Palmdale-Lancaster area, about 90 miles north-east of L.A. The LA county library infrastructure consists of some 50 different libraries. They usually have whatever one is ordering, but Gooch's work seems like a long shot. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:41, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Gwillhickers: Don't know what prompted Gooch into writing Park's biography. Yes, I do believe this is one of the dozens of ILL books I ordered this year in Michigan. However I believe it came under the author Lawrence C. Wroth, as I see the date of publication is 1926. It seems to be some sort of reprint. Also here it is online at HathiTrust. I have been in the reconstructed Park's print shop a dozen times of the picture shown in the article that is located in Colonial Williamsburg on Duke of Gloucester Street. We have visited Colonial Williamsburg several times over the years. Here is a set of 1000 pictures we took of our 2006 trip to Colonial Williamsburg. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:29, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: — Okay, I'm impressed, very. Nice research, great pictures! Who's that fella sitting next to you on the bench? :-)  I'm making use of Wroth's other 1926 work, William Parks, printer and journalist of England and colonial Williamsburg, per Hathitrust. I added it to the Bibliography. Since there is now two 1926 works by Wroth, we simply distinguish between the two by designating 1926a and 1926b in the respective templates and sfn citations. I also located an interesting account about Goosh at Encyclopedia Virginia. Goosh had commissioned Parks to print some propaganda concerning a 1730 act regulating tobacco production and trade, and had the account printed anonymously. Will be adding this to the narrative soon. I'm gong to dig a little deeper first. A great pleasure working with you. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Gwillhickers: I believe that person sitting next to me is Thomas Jefferson. I came across him in 2004 when we visited Colonial Williamsburg. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Death date

@Doug Coldwell: While looking into Parks' final days and death I noticed that the lede, since before I began editing this article, indicates April 1, 1750 as the date of death, while the Later life and death section has March 23 for this date, cited by Thomas, 1874, and Krope, 1983. Where are we getting April 1st from in the lede? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:42, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Gwillhickers: Thomas (1874) page 334(top left of book) says, On the 23d of March, 1750, he embarked in one of the trading ships for England. Soon after the vessel sailed, he was seized with pleurisy, which terminated his life on the first of April of that year. His remains were carried to England, and interred at Gosport. I provided the page link in the Bibliography source for Thomas.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Further reading

• @Doug Coldwell: — Yeah, I've always noticed that sources listed in Further reading, with cite book, show a harv error as not being used (linked to a cite). As such I didn't think it mattered. If it's acceptable I'll re-list them with straight text, tomorrow. Was checking in before I logged out. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

(!)  I see you've already converted to straight text. Thanks! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Images of works

• @Doug Coldwell: A better image of Stith's/Park's book exists at archive.org, which I captured and uploaded, shown at right. I was going to replace/overwrite the existing image but it's protected. I'd recommend replacing it, as the color of the newer version is realistic and the letters are not blurred. Also, as you probably know, many books have been re-digitized since 2013 and are now available in searchable pdf files. If you haven't done so already, you can download the searchable version here. I'm going to look into what's available regarding the other images in the Works section for possible inclusion here. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
• @Gwillhickers:  Done uploaded the color version of Stith's 1747 cover page. Thanks for the improved images. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:38, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

existing image

Stith, History of the First Discovery and Settlement of Virginia

Stith, History of the First Discovery and Settlement of Virginia, title page

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article, using the template below. I hope to complete the review over the next couple of days and stack it up for User:Doug Coldwell when he gets back. Ganesha811 (talk) 17:08, 13 December 2021 (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.	Made a number of prose edits, but issues remain - see 3a below. Pass on prose - I will make some tweaks before promoting.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass, no issues.
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.	Pass, no issues.
	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).	Good sources used, no issues noted. Pass.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Well-cited, no OR found.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Nothing found by Earwig or manual spot check. Pass.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Some of the information seems contradictory. When did he stop publishing for Maryland? We have two dates ("He did this until 1737" and "later ended his service for Maryland in 1733.")?  Done = s/b 1733 When did he move to VA? It's said that there was no printing there until 1729, but he is later said to have published the laws of VA for the government in 1727. Did he do that from Maryland?  Done = s/b 1729 A lot of the information in the Immigration to America section in general seems to repeat itself several times. It is confusing to read as you cannot be sure if you have already been told the information given (him being hired as printer for VA, him printing general laws, him opening a newspaper, etc). Please read through it and condense so that information is not unnecessarily repeated. Chronological order would be good - the chronology is very confused just now even after my slight edits.  Done The paper mill section is better written and does not repeat as much.  Done The information about 1745-49 references to his paper mill are repeated in his death section and it is unclear to me why. Is it that there were no longer any references after his death, so it may have closed? Please rephrase to clarify.  Done
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	See comments above in 3a.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Pass, no issues with neutrality.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Major work done in November, no edit wars. Pass.
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.	Pass, no issues.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	I don't think the first image, of the sign, is necessary at all. It can be removed from the article.  Done The caption on the image of the reconstructed office can be improved: "Reconstruction of Parks' print shop and post office at Colonial Williamsburg"  Done
	7. Overall assessment.

Comment

@Ganesha811: As you may know, Doug is recovering from an accident and probably won't be around for some time longer. As one of the editors of the article, I will be happy to address and deal with any issues that may arise. Cheers. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

@Gwillhickers: thank you. Doug did let me know, and he didn't mind me "stacking" up a couple reviews for him when he returns. Of course, if you'd like to make fixes before then, that's very welcome too. Ganesha811 (talk) 08:13, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ganesha811: Issues brought up have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: yes, I will complete the second half of the review shortly. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:55, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: I've completed the review and some issues remain to be fixed. No rush, I don't know if you're fully back yet, just let me know when you've had a look at them. Ganesha811 (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ganesha811: Additional issues brought up have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

This article now meets the GA criteria. I will do the needful to pass it. Congratulations to you and all others who worked on it! Ganesha811 (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

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)