Nominator(s): Neelix (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
This article is about an English Australian street evangelist who was little-known while he was alive but whose story became widely repeated and distorted after his death. The article received an independent copy edit from a member of the Guild of Copy Editors and was later promoted to good status. Neelix (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Comment. Hi Neelix, welcome back to FAC. It's fine by me that this article was initially tagged with the WP:Milhist cat ... because you never know, sources might have been found that added details to his military career. But it hasn't happened yet ... apparently, the sources don't say much more about his military career than that he deserted from two navies and bought his way out of a third ... so I don't believe this meets the bar for Milhist-tagged articles, and I've removed the tag. I'm open to hearing other ideas, though. - Dank (push to talk) 14:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest in this article, Dan! I don't mind that you've removed the Military History WikiProject tag from the article's talk page. If you have any further thoughts about the article, please let me know! Neelix (talk) 20:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
"When he was 24, he deserted again, this time in Australia." - did he desert from the United States Navy to the Australian Navy?
"but after he died, tales of his evangelistic activities circulated widely" - I'm not sure if 'tales' sounds informal or not, but feel free to ignore if I'm wrong
" in Southampton, Hampshire, England, United Kingdom" - this is too much. I'd remove either 'England' or 'United Kingdom' (also in the infobox)
"but deserted in New York City, New York, United States" - too much here again! I would remove either 'New York' or 'United States'
"Jenner's daughter said in an interview" - stated
"the United States Navy took him to Melbourne, Australia, and he deserted again" - this gives me the wrong impression that the United States Navy specifically took him to Melbourne. Were they on a training exercise etc?
"in 1937 when he was legally discharged from the navy" - the lead doesn't mention that he joined the Australian Navy nor that he bought his way out
"they returned to Sydney on SS Oronsay" - I think the SS Oronsay is linked incorrectly
"Stanton went on to found the Jesus Army" - when? In what year did he found it? It also would be interesting to know if Jenner had an influence with the Jesus Army
You might want to consider the option of using either British or Australian spelling for this article, given that they have an equal amount of ties to this subject. Personally I'm neutral with it, but it's just something to give you a heads-up over just in case other reviewers mention it
That's what I could find with the prose, other than that though this is another excellent and interesting article. Well done on writing this! A couple of the points I mentioned were minor, so you can ignore them if you want. JAGUAR 18:55, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the review, Jaguar! I believe that I have addressed most of your concerns. You asked whether Jenner deserted from the United States Navy to the Australian Navy. He did not; he left the United States Navy circa 1927 (when he was 24) and joined the Australian Navy circa 1936 (soon before accompanying HMAS Canberra to Sydney in August of that year). Is there a way that you would like this to be made clearer in the article? You also mentioned the possibility that Jenner influenced the Jesus Army. Apart from Jenner's role in the founder's conversion to Christianity, it is unlikely that Jenner had any influence on the Jesus Army; Stanton founded the organization after Jenner had become debilitated by Parkinson's disease. Please let me know if I can do more to address any of the concerns you have raised or if you have any others. Neelix (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing them, Neelix! I think I might have over-scrutinised the lead, so the mention of him deserting in Australia should be fine for the reader. Everything else of my prose review has been addressed, so I'll be happy to support this article. Well done on all the work put into this one, this really was interesting for me. JAGUAR 16:36, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Generally good stuff. Some particular concerns, however:
First sentence Too long, I think. Could you split it up? I suggest Frank Arthur "Bones" Jenner (surname often misspelled Genor) (2 November 1903 – 8 May 1977) was an English Australianevangelist. He was famous for his signature approach to evangelism, which was to ask people on George Street, Sydney, "If you died within 24 hours, where would you be in eternity? Heaven or hell?"
He eventually joined the Royal Navy, but In the context of the lead, you haven't explained why this is eventually. I think you can omit the word.
When he was 24, he deserted again, this time in Australia, where he worked for the Royal Australian Navy until buying his way out in 1937. Overly complex. I suggest When he was 24, he deserted again while in Australia. He subsequently worked for the Royal Australian Navy until he bought his way out in 1937.
In 1952, The Reverend Francis Dixon Lowercase the needed.
Thenceforward I agree that this is a word, but it seems slightly affected. Why not From this point on?
Jenner eventually joined the Royal Navy I still don't understand why this was "eventually". It would be more useful to tell us his age at the time.
There, he met Charlie Peters Unnecessary comma.
The Navigators Lowercase "the".
For 28 years, from his initial conversion until his debility from Parkinson's disease, Jenner engaged in this form of evangelism, probably speaking with more than 100,000 people in total, hundreds of whom made initial professions of conversion to Christianity. Too many subclauses! For 28 years, from his initial conversion until his debility from Parkinson's disease, Jenner engaged in this form of evangelism. He probably spoke with more than 100,000 people, hundreds of whom made initial professions of conversion to Christianity.
Repetition of "normally" in the Evangelism section.
who was serving in the Royal Australian Air Force at the time "at the time" is unnecessary.
The first sentence of Discovery by Francis Dixon seems a classic case of WP:OVERCITE. Why does The Reverend need citing, for instance?
There, Dixon hoped to find Jenner, whose name he did not yet know. Odd start to a sentence. Dixon hoped to find Jenner there, although he did not yet know his name.
connected Dixon with him Vague. What does it mean? "Introduced"?
The picture of Ray Comfort seems out of place in the article, as does the picture of the tsetse fly. Neither to my mind matches WP:PERTINENCE, which requires that images be "significantly and directly related to the article's topic".
Thank you for reviewing this article, Relentlessly! I have implemented most of your recommendations, with a few exceptions. I retained the capital "T" in "The Reverend" and "The Navigators" because I believe this to be correct; see the content of both The Reverend and The Navigators (organization) for examples of such capitalization. I also retained the second instance of "eventually"; we don't know the age at which Jenner joined the Royal Navy, and I want to be sure to avoid implying to the reader that this joining of the Royal Navy was the same event as his joining of the training ship for misbehaving boys. I retained the comma in the phrase "There, he met Charlie Peters" because I believe this to be correct; this is my understanding of appropriate punctuation in the case of adverbial clauses. Finally, I removed the image of the tsetse fly but retained the image of Ray Comfort; it is common for writers about the subject of the article to be pictured in the article, and I think this image to be significantly and directly related to the article's topic. Of course, if consensus develops against my position on this point, I will be glad remove the image. I hope I have adequately addressed your concerns. Please let me know if I have not or if you have any more to add. Neelix (talk) 04:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
From The Reverend: "When the style is used within a sentence, the is correctly in lower-case"! The same goes for the Navigators, I think. Our article is mixed in its use, but here's a Washington Post article that uses the lowercase "the".
Can I suggest "after some time" instead of "eventually"? The latter word carries implications that the former does not.
You are correct about adverbial phrases, but this isn't an adverbial phrase. It's one word, so it's an adverb and the comma is not necessary.
Thank you for responding so promptly to my comments, Relentlessly! I have fixed the capitalization of "the" in "the Reverend" and have switched out "eventually" for "after some time". I still think a capital "T" is appropriate in the case of The Navigators; they use a capital "T" on their official website. My understanding is that the comma applies to adverbials in general rather than adverbial phrases specifically; see, for example, the sentence with "surprisingly" on the Adverbial article. I appreciate your willingness to discuss these small details with me! I would certainly be glad to learn that there is a rule of capitalization or punctuation that I have been employing incorrectly in my writing. Neelix (talk) 14:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Neelix. I disagree about both, I have to say, but I'm willing to agree they are adiaphora. So I'm very happy to support this now. Relentlessly (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Comment from Z105space – Good article so far. Here is one comment
The fifth picture lacks alt text.
Once my issues and the issues raised by Relentlessly are rectified, I will gladly give my support. Z105space(talk) 19:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement, Z105space! I appreciate you picking up on the alt text omission; it has been corrected. Neelix (talk) 04:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Since the remaining issues have been rectified, I can give my Support to this article. Z105space(talk) 07:23, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
File:SS_ORONSAY_underway_near_Circular_Quay_(13860178344).jpg: per the tag, is more specific licensing information available?
File:Frank_Jenner_the_evangelist.jpg: what was the creation date of this image? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the image review, Nikkimaria! I have added a PD-Australia tag to the image of SS Oronsay. I have been unable to discover the specific date of creation for File:Frank_Jenner_the_evangelist.jpg, but it was sometime between 1937 and 1953, and I have added these dates to the image. I hope these additions to the images' Commons pages address your concerns. Neelix (talk) 14:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay. The issue is that, while both images are undoubtedly PD in Australia, depending on the specific date they may or may not be PD in the US. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Our guidelines on country-specific public domain rules state that "Australian photographs taken before January 1, 1946, not published in the U.S., and where no copyright was registered in the U.S., are in the public domain in Australia and the U.S." That clears the photograph of SS Oronsay; the photograph was taken during the ship's pre-war career, so it was taken sometime between 1925 and 1939. I will have to contact Ann Carruthers to see if she can give me a more specific creation date for File:Frank Jenner the evangelist.jpg. Neelix (talk) 15:27, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I have removed File:Frank Jenner the evangelist.jpg from the article while I wait for a response from Ann Carruthers, Jenner's daughter. If she is able to inform me that it was taken in 1946 or earlier, I will readd the image to the article. Neelix (talk) 00:45, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Per a nudge on my talk page, I will carry out a source review for this article.
A few quick points first of all:
Why not just call him Australian at the start? He's notable for what he did on George Street in Sydney. WP:OPENPARA says previous nationalities and/or place of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless relevant to the subject's notability. (You could instead add "Born and raised in England" before "At the age of 12", or somewhere else in the lead.)
In the infobox we give his allegiance as Australia and service branch as the Royal Australian Navy, but per the article's body Jenner served in the Royal Navy and the US Navy too.
There is also a Bexley in southern England. I would clarify that the place Jenner attended church was in New South Wales.
Bedfordshire, next door to my home county of Hertfordshire, is not in the east of England (I know it is for statistical purposes, but to any English person the "east" is East Anglia). Bedfordshire would be better described as being in south-eastern England.
Perhaps clarify where Hebron School is. I presumed it was in the city of Hebron to the south of Jerusalem.
We say Stanton "converted to Christianity" after his experience with Jenner. I'm really not sure about the accuracy of this wording. "Conversion" is usually used when a person actually leaves another religion, whereas Stanton would almost certainly have been at least nominally Christian already. Per the wording at this source, I think it is more accurate to say Stanton became a committed Christian, or something along those lines, than to say he "converted".
The above is a wording actually repeated several times throughout the article. I think it would better to say these people "became Christians", "became believers" or something along those lines, as, to reiterate, they probably would have been at least nominally affiliated to a Christian denomination already.
OK, source review. I'll check formatting first.
Some of the sources have locations given (Ahn, Wilkinson, Wilson) while others do not. Be consistent on this.
What's the ASSIST News Service? Where's it based and who publishes it?
Where's the Jesus Army based? Northampton or thereabouts, no?
How about Counsel Magazine? Where's this based? Who wrote the article? Who published the magazine?
I'll carry out some spotchecks later. Hope this helps. Cheers —Cliftonian(talk) 07:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestions and source review, John! I have implemented all of your proposed changes, although the last one only partially; I retained the words "converted" and "conversion" where they refer to Jenner, but have replaced them wherever they refer to someone else's experience. I hope this compromise is satisfactory. I agree that conversion connotes switching from one organized religion to another, although the broader denotation of the word includes switching from a state of not believing the central tenants of one's affiliate religion to a state of believing in them. The article would become very wordy if we were to alter all references to Jenner's conversion to avoid the word "conversion". I have added the locations for all the books as well as the Jesus Army website. I have removed the ASSIST News Service and Council Magazine sources; I added them several years ago and I haven't been able to find evidence of their reliability. Considering that they were only there as examples of erroneous stories about Jenner, it's not a big loss to remove them. Thanks for offering to do spot checks! Neelix (talk) 16:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for taking a while to get back to this, David, things have been a bit hectic here. I think in the interests of avoiding a lot of repetition your compromise regarding the word "conversion" is all right. Regarding the locations: almost no-one will know where Nether Heyford is, and even Northampton is a bit obscure for non-Brits—you've even got other Northamptons in the world—so it might be worth putting "Northampton, England" or "Northampton, UK" in there, and the same for Nether Heyford. It might be worth giving the state for Philadelphia too just for consistency.
For spot-checks: I am afraid I am having to run out of the house just now but I will try to do some over the rest of the weekend. I'm sorry for keeping you waiting. Cheers and I hope this helps. —Cliftonian(talk) 10:03, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
No worries about the wait, John! I really appreciate your taking the time to perform this source review. I have added the additional location specifiers you requested and I look forward to your spot-checks. Feel free to take your time! I know life can be busy. Neelix (talk) 15:00, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
OK, spotchecks now.
Ahn (notes 44 and 45): This version on Google books seems to have "Mr Genor" on pp. 229–230, rather than pp. 226–228 as our article presently has. I presume you worked from a different pressing? In any case the information is there.
Goodwin (47): checks out.
I don't have access to the Wilkinson film, which is cited in a few places, but I've found a trailer for it here and it seems to check out: the trailer seems to me to confirm at least notes 19 and 25. On this basis I think I'm willing to AGF on the rest sourced to the film.
I can't find an online preview of the Wilson book. Now on this one I'm going to have to be a bit more stringent as it is the main source supporting the article. Do you think you could quote me the source material for the passage on Jenner's experience with the Glanton Exclusive Brethen on Collins Street in 1937—from "One of the men was engaging" to "which angered them"—so I can check for accurate representation and copyvio/paraphrasing? Thanks. —Cliftonian(talk) 16:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the spot checks, John! Page 226 of the Ahn book isn't showing for me online, but the corresponding page in the physical book states that Ahn received the story from Comfort. I have switched the other page number and added more information about how Ahn's and Wilson's accounts differ. Here is the passage you requested from the Wilson book:
One day in Collins Street, Melbourne, he saw a circle of serious-faced men standing outside the National Bank. Curious as to what they were doing, Frank came closer. They were brethren of the Glanton fellowship, an English offshoot of the original Exclusive Brethren. Among them was Cyril Flowers, the inventor of the iridoscope. It was an open-air gospel meeting and one of the men was preaching to the passers-by. Never one to shirk the human contact, Frank stood by to hear what he was 'spouting on about'. When the gospel preacher had finished, Frank, with the gambler’s reckless abandon, stepped into the circle and announced to the dark-suited gentlemen,
"I’ve got some good news for you, too. I'll listen to your story if you listen to mine". With a flourish, he produced his dice and launched into an explanation of the game of 'crap'. Soon he had the austere brethren down with him on the pavement trying to roll the dice in the heart of Melbourne's business district. When the intricacies of the game had been explained, Mr Gibson who with his wife lived in a flat above the National Bank spoke to Frank and said, "There are people here who would like to give you a cup of tea and tell you more about the Lord Jesus Christ and how you can be saved".
Frank responded to the invitation and went upstairs where he heard the gospel for the first time. He must have accepted Christ immediately, for when he came home that day, he told Jessie "You are a sinner and going to hell and need to be saved".
Jessie thought he had gone mad and was suffering from some sort of religious mania. As money was scarce and Frank, because of his gambling habit was not a good provider, she left him to work on a farm at Corowa 200 kms from Melbourne on the N.S.W. border. She took their little daughter Ann with her, vowing to return only when he came to his senses.
Frank was still gambling and had no money. He stayed in Melbourne, witnessing aggressively to Jessie's brothers. They resented this and ridiculed him, pointing to his gambling habit and the fact that he was not able to support his wife and child. The more he spoke, the more they hated it and on one occasion they came to blows. They (apart from Frances) were never reconciled to him. Frank also wrote back to his own family in England telling of his conversion and urging them also to become Christians. None responded.
I hope that helps with the spot checks! Let me know if you would like me to quote any other passages. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Firstly, while I'm sure the preacher may well have referred to the gospel as the "Good News"—that is what the word "gospel" means—the source material as quoted does not say he did so. A way around this might be to link Jenner's riposte about good news of his own to the article gospel, and put a footnote in explaining what "Good News" means in this context.
The bits about playing craps on the pavement, hearing about Christ in the flat, calling his wife a sinner, being thought insane by Jessie and not being a good provider seem to me to check out with no glaring issues regarding paraphrasing.
The last sentence—"He also wrote to his family back in England, telling them about his religious conversion and asking them to become Christians as well, but they did not respond."—seems to me too close to the original source material. I'd suggest rewording to "Jenner received no reply when he wrote to his family back in England informing them of his conversion, and asking them to become Christians too." Or something like that.
Thanks for typing in all that source material, David; great effort. I'll call this spot-checked now. Just have a look at sentence I highlighted in my last point above, and the point about the Good News. Thanks and I hope this source review helps. Cheers! —Cliftonian(talk) 19:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
I have made all of the changes you suggested. Thank you for your advice, John! I think the addition of the footnote you recommended is particularly helpful in improving the article. Neelix (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)