Talk:Amos Singletary

Children

He had nine children; what should be listed in the article? Here's a table (adapted from Crane & Dunbar 1915, p. 591):

Name	Sex	Birth date	Spouse	Marriage date	Death date	Other
Greely Singletary	F	August 15, 1743	Joseph Allen	January 15, 1772
John Singletary	M	March 17, 1745	Sarah Jennison	April 15, 1767		His son, also John, was baptized January 19, 1772
Mary Singletary	F	June 1747	Elisha Gale	April 8, 1767
Mehitable Singletary	F	March 13, 1749	Peter Jennison	March 31, 1769
Hannah Singletary	F	March 15, 1753	Jonathan Gould Solomon Dwinel	January 30, 1770 April 1, 1783
Azubah Singletary	F	December 9, 1754	unmarried		age 20
Amos Singletary Jr.	M	March 11, 1757	Betsey Johnson	(January 9?) 1777
Richard Singletary	M	November 9, 1760
Thankful Singletary	F	October 30, 1762	Ebenezer Burnap

It's also worth noting that though records say 7 female, 2 male, this seems like 6 female, 3 male. --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 13:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

I've added a footnote that has a list of his children and their birth dates. I also changed the number of males and females to three and six, respectively, since the names seem to make it that way, in contrast to what sources say (unless Richard is female...?). --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 15:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

source review tips

To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:

• First, copy/paste importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); to Special:MyPage/common.js .
• On the same page and below that script add importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');. Save that page.
• Finally go to to Special:MyPage/common.css and add .citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */.

When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 03:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amos Singletary/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 15:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• I'm seeing a lot of quotes. Perhaps some of them could be removed, or put into text. For instance, this quote: "so we may have the worship of God set up amongst us." is not necessary, because all churches are set up for the purpose of worshipping a God.

• Gotcha. Also condensed the lead on this advice. Hameltion (talk, contribs)

• given the length of the article, sentences like this one "On January 5 and May 22, 1775, Singletary was elected to be a delegate of Sutton to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress in Cambridge held on February 1 and a second congress in Watertown on May 31." would be much better split up into something like this "On January 5, Singletary was elected to be a delegate of Sutton to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress in Cambridge held on February 1. Later, on May 22, 1775 he was elected again, to a second congress in Watertown on May 31."

• Okay - split them. Hameltion (talk, contribs)

• Instead of only referring to him as 'Singletary", you could intersperse a few "he"s and the like.

• Thanks, I've generally kept one "Singletary" at the start of a section and then only where needed for clarity. Hameltion (talk, contribs)

• "Singletary was chosen on September 25, 1786, to be a delegate to a county convention in Leicester to ask for the state capital to be moved out of Boston." is there anything else about the convention? I feel like it jumps rather quickly off the topic.

• I've modified the following sentence so that it hopefully makes sense why they disliked Boston. Hameltion (talk, contribs)

• Did he do nothing after 1788?

• In my review of the town's annals, I don't see any mentions of him after then except for trivial things like sales/purchases. I also imagine that once he was age 67 or so, he became less active, and perhaps less called upon once the US was up and running, so to speak. (Though this is just speculation.) Hameltion (talk, contribs)

• Perhaps then just add a sentence saying something like "Sutton lived the rest of his life out in relative obscurity."Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:27, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• I am pleasantly surprised that you have found a published historian (Wakelyn) who reached the same consensus. I have quoted him. Hameltion (talk, contribs) 18:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• some more images might be nice. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• I agree. What do you imagine they should illustrate? Also - though several of the works cited have images of other Worcester County elites, I have not found a portrait of Singletary. Perhaps his tombstone? Hameltion (talk, contribs) 20:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• I would not use a tombstone. If no portrait of Singletary exists, so be it. I have found some similar articles as far as available information goes, that you might use for ideas. Joseph H. Allen, Samuel Turell Armstrong, William Gaston (Massachusetts), etc. Simply filling in the inbox, with term information, predecessors, successors, and the like would also be enough. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:27, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• I don't know how to fill in predecessor/successor for this article - I'd like your help with this. For instance, see the Whitney source that makes it seem like senators were elected en masse instead of for individual seats. Also, I didn't mean to suggest using a tombstone for the infobox; that was a miscommunication on my part. Hameltion (talk, contribs) 18:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Certainly, you can use the tombstone elsewhere. If the predecessor/successors are impossible to ascertain, leave them out. I'd like to approve the article, pending addition of at least one more image. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:53, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Many thanks! (This is my first good article nomination.) I added a map showing Sutton within Massachusetts but it could be replaced by this image or something similar --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 19:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Hameltion I know how great this must feel for you, because it seems like just yesterday I was getting my first GA approved. It is with greatest pleasure that I announce my decision to pass the article. I have no reservations, and there is nothing else I could find. Good luck, and Happy Editing! Carpe noctem!