This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Book is possibly by John Carey, not Mathew Carey.edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There is a possibility that the 1793 book on this shorthand was written not by Mathew Carey as mentioned in the article, but by his brother John Carey. At least, a facsimile reprint of the book credits John Carey with authorship and says nothing about Mathew.
The full title of this book, which I have, is "The system of shorthand, practiced by Mr. Thomas Lloyd, in taking down the debates of Congress; and now (with his permission) published for general use, by J.C." This title is given not only on the modern cover for the reprint, but also on the facsimile page of the original edition. John Carey is not mentioned in the original, only identified as "J.C."; the full name is only on the front cover, which is a modern cover.
Would this be authoritative enough to justify actually changing the article from mentioning Mathew Carey to John Carey instead? M.J.E. (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
