Talk:John Motz

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 15:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Will take this one. (I enjoyed the last German-Canadian). —Kusma (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Progress template

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Notes

An interesting and successful immigrant life. The pictures are relevant and you have done your due diligence to prove them PD. Stable and neutral. Earwig is for some reason unhappy about Coschi's thesis, although I find similarities with the DCB stronger; Richardson 1998 seems to have been the structural blueprint here (and some phrases look a bit close, like "worked as a farm-hand and a shingle cutter" ... "his own tailoring business"). Anyway, it is certainly good enough for the copyvio tick. Good sources, no original research.

For prose/broadness/focus/MOS, I'll go through the content section by section, with the lead section and infobox done at the end. I'll also ask lots of content questions, which do not necessarily mean that I am asking you to take any action in the article.

• Early life: Fixed the Diedorf (there are at least two in Thuringia, and our article is about the wrong one). Confirmed both by staring at maps until my eyes hurt and with the corresponding German Wikipedia articles. However, I'm not convinced it was in Thuringia administratively at that point; you claim Prussian citizenship elsewhere, and it seems it was in Landkreis Mühlhausen i. Th., Province of Saxony, Kingdom of Prussia. While the "i. Th." stands for "in Thuringia", this is probably just the disambiguator, compare Mühlhausen (disambiguation) for the necessity of disambiguation. (Thuringia looks like an absolute mess in the 19th century, but it is substantially less complicated than before 1806). It seems confusing that the family home was in a different country, but that's what your source says. (It wasn't far from Mühlhausen to some territories belonging to Saxe-Coburg and Gotha if you look at the maps in that article). It is also odd that we're not told what town the property was in.

  (BTW I'm mostly trying to understand what happened, I'm not so much telling you to write all or any of this in the article). Our Diedorf is in the Eichsfeld (close to the south end on both of the historic maps in that article), an area that belonged to the Electorate of Mainz until 1803 and was hence deeply Catholic (and Motz was baptized on the day of his birth [1]). Mühlhausen, on the other hand, was a Free Imperial City and was Protestant, as was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

  Complicated stuff. I changed it in the infobox.

  • I think I'll shut up if you change "the family's home" to "the family's property" (as in the source) in the story about the brother, then I can stop wondering why they didn't live in their home.

  • Done.

  • For a compromise between correctness and simplicity, could you change "Thuringia" at least to "now Thuringia"? Slightly more correct versions that I'd like better would be "Province of Saxony, Prussia; now Thuringia" or "Diedorf, near Mühlhausen in Thuringia, then part of Prussia". I'd like to see the Prussian citizenship in the infobox make some sense.

  • Changed to the following: Diedorf, near Mühlhausen in the Province of Saxony, Prussia (today part of Thuringia, Germany).

  • One could argue that this could mean the entire Province of Saxony is now part of Thuringia, which isn't true (large parts of the former Prussian province now belong to Saxony-Anhalt and some areas to Saxony). But most things I can come up with can be similarly misunderstood, so I'll let it pass.

• You could consider displaying the birth name more prominently; it seems likely he used it until emigrating.

  The only sourcing I have regarding his name is from Richardson 1998, which says he was baptized as Johannes. While I know it was and is quite common for new immigrants to anglicize their names, I don't have any secondary sources regarding Motz specifically, so I'm hesitant to have anything more than footnote.

  • Fair enough. The thing called a "baptism certificate" in the UWaterloo library exhibit (the thing itself says it is an "extract from the register of the born and baptized at the church of St. Alban at Diedorf", which is the predecessor of this church) does actually spell him (and his father, and his godfather) "Joannes", but they might be using the Latin spelling here, and arguably deciphering old handwriting is WP:OR :)

  • Yeah, the University of Waterloo's online fonds have some pretty interesting things, though not especially helpful here lest we stray into OR.

• I feel some of the prose could be tightened a little, and perhaps you could even omit some things you know when they lead to further questions you can't answer. (Where was the family property? Did he have a tailoring business in two villages at the same time or one after the other?)
• The US tour doesn't quite work out. He started his Wild West-inspired tour in 1857, worked for a year, and returned home in 1857? I also don't see the relevance of Joachim Kalbfleisch here. And why did he have to "establish a livelihood", didn't he have his own tailoring business?

• Cut out Kalbfleisch and the livelihood bit.

• Berliner Journal: It seems crazy to return to a German-dominated town in order to master English, but more power to him. (His life seems a bit erratic at this point).
• They hoped to start ..., determining it would be easier to acquire ... than to found their own This is confusing: Did they wish to start their own newspaper or did they prefer not to?

• Cleared up.

• Could mention what language the Telegraph was written in.

• Added (English).

• provided technical expertise to work as simplify? I think "was" carries most of the meaning already, and you have the technical expertise again a few lines later. BTW they also worked as general printers.

• I simplified it somewhat, let me know if you meant something else here.

• foreign news and working to cultivate local German culture I'd go for "foreign news and local German culture" unless that is contradicted by the sources.

• Went with your wording.

• Generally, the prose flow at Berliner Journal seems superior.

• Yeah, I spent a lot more time tinkering on that one than this one ...

• Most newspapers founded in Ontario quickly failed, but the Journal achieved and maintained success over several decades. Scholar Herbert Karl Kalbfleisch reflects that the quick success of the Journal was due to the strong combination of Rittinger's expertise as a technical director and Motz's "facile pen" Simplify/start with the important thing for the biography first? "The Journal quickly became successful, and remained so over several decades, which HKK credits to [...]" ? Perhaps you could also mention here that they bought lots of other newspapers. [2].

• Went with your wording here. I don't think the UWaterloo library exhibit is quite right there, as those papers are not mentioned at all in any of my sources. Per my work over at the Berliner Journal page, you'll see most of the newspaper buying was done by Rittinger and Motz's sons.

• I assume they were led astray (just like I was) by the sons also being called "Rittinger and Motz".

• Tolerance / neutrality / cultural promotion: This is in a bit of a strange order and could also be tightened. Move the church parish to a personal life/family section? Given that they founded the most successful German newspaper, I'm not too certain how much one should stress one scholar's opinion that they were not out to make money. Did Motz really pledge to be "neutral, but leaning towards the Reform Party"?

• Moved the church bit to a new Personal life section. I agree it's a bit silly. I don't want to eliminate it entirely b/c it's all Entz really has to say, so I've moved it into a note. I don't have access to Motz's original editorial, but Monkiewicz & Skidmore say this is what he wrote.

• OK, until we can see the original editorial (happy to provide a translation if you can find an archived copy), probably best to assume they mean what they write here.

• I don't think I'll be able to find one. Simon Fraser University digitzed copies running from 1880 to 1916, but nothing else.

Will do the other section (that I have far fewer quibbles about at first glance, other than that I think you might move the family out to a separate section) later. Overall, removing some of the details that don't have an obvious relevance to the later life could help to improve the flow. —Kusma (talk) 14:53, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

• OK, Political and community activity section.
• I don't quite understand how things are sorted into the paragraphs. The first paragraph has local politics, charity, national politics. The second paragraph has local culture societies and double-national sentiment. The third paragraph has family, sheriff, legacy, retirement, death. I'd probably separate the family out and have the sheriff closer to the mayor position. (I don't know what exactly the sheriff did, but where I live, the Lord Mayor and the Sheriff are two people elected by the city council for mostly representative purposes). Suggest one paragraph politics, possibly including sherriff, one paragraph for charities and societies and a separately headed Family/legacy/death section.

• Reorganized things a bit per your recommendation.

• Could you elaborate on who elected him mayor? The "by-election" link makes it look like a popular vote, but I'm kind of expecting that he was just voted on by the town council.

• Going by memory, I don't think the source specifies. I'll get back to you on this one once I can get my hands on the book again.
• The source unfortunately uses the passive voice, saying "The late Jon Motz was elected mayor of Berlin at an election necessitated by the death of Louis Breithaupt, Sr., in July 1880 and re-elected in January 1881." I've removed the by-election mention and changed it to simply "election".

• That answers my concern.

• Linking to media proprietor makes him look quite a bit more powerful than I had thought.

• Agreed; removed and replaced with "publisher".

• Was the promotion of German in high schools successful, and did Motz use his position in the school board to work towards it, or just use his newspaper to advertise it to people already speaking German?

• I don't have any information regarding what he did on school board. The campaign to have German-language instruction in schools though was largely successful. Added info via a note.

• one needed to honour the customs of his mother country does this have to use male default language?

• Changed.

• BTW is Kalbfleisch the scholar related to Kalbfleisch the friend?

• Perhaps distantly, since he is local to this area, but I haven't seen him discuss it anywhere.

OK, first pass done. Lots of comments. My overall impression: well-researched from decent sources. Prose could use tightening, and perhaps you could lose some details that detract a bit from the life story for a more compelling read. Should all be reasonably easy to do. I'll look at the lead once you've reacted to the first round of comments. Happy editing, —Kusma (talk) 22:33, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Went through and made several changes. I may be a little slow to respond over the next week due to work, so please be patient with me! Thanks. Tkbrett (✉) 16:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Happy with the changes so far (some comments inline above). One further idea: you could briefly mention the wife's background (also first generation German immigrant etc.) unless you don't trust anything the UWaterloo librarians say about Motz: [3]. Will look at lead and read through a second time soon. No rush with finding out about the by-election. For the GA review, I'm happy to accept what is in the sources even if it surprises me, but I'd still like to know whether they really had annual popular votes for mayor. —Kusma (talk) 21:42, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The hold came in and I'll be able to pick up the book from the library either tomorrow or Monday. I don't think I'm going to include anything from the digital fonds, but it's interesting stuff nonetheless, I find it interesting mostly because of her sister's connection to the Lang Tannery, a building that still stands and now houses a great craft brewery, amongst other businesses.

That's a massive building, looks like they were pretty successful :) If you have any other source that states Helena Vogt was born in Germany and gives her years of birth and death, I'd suggest to include those. If not, fine to leave this out.

There are some more comments above (not many). Final round: the lead, which looks good. Tiny questions, though, in the following. —Kusma (talk) 21:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

• Lead: well, Thuringia again. Born in what is now Thuringia? In the Eichsfeld, now part of Thuringia?

• Changed to the following: Born near Mühlhausen in the Province of Saxony, Prussia (today part of Thuringia, Germany) ...

• Can you explain what the role of honorary sheriff meant?

• I don't have any further details. I imagine not much, kind of like modern day town criers.

• My local sheriffs spend most of their time giving opening speeches or standing around with their chain of office looking important, so I was expecting something similar from yours. —Kusma (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

• We're probably done here. Looking at Google Maps, apparently his house [4] was destroyed despite protests, so you can't go and get a new picture like you did for Rittinger. This looks like a pretty cool resource telling us the wife immigrated to Canada with her parents at age 16, but I don't know who writes this site. A very nice article! —Kusma (talk) 21:58, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks Kusma for your thorough and thoughtful review. I believe Motz's house is still standing and the demolition plans are still under review. The home looks slightly different than it used to. Here's an early 20th-century image (I'm 90% sure that's John Motz in the rocking chair on the porch and 99% William John Motz is second from the left) and here is an image from 2015 (Google Street View from this year as well). I believe it's now used for low-income housing; where Rittinger's home was restored sometime in the last decade, Motz's clearly hasn't been. (Rittinger's home actually sold for a cool CA$1,500,000. We joked about putting in an offer but it's a little past our price range ...) Tkbrett (✉) 22:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

    @Tkbrett: Looks like I didn't look at Google maps/ streetview close enough. An interesting house. As for interesting property on the market: I don't currently have the money or otherwise a need for office space in London, but the stylish option for writing the article about A Voyage Round the World would be the top floor of the building where Georg Forster lived when he wrote A Voyage Round the World :) —Kusma (talk) 20:59, 19 September 2021 (UTC)