Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Y. Brown (1835–1904)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 03:32, 8 April 2011 [1].

John Y. Brown (1835–1904) edit

Nominator(s): Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 16:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A U.S. Representative and governor of Kentucky, Brown was first refused a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives for being too young. On his second election, he was denied his seat because of alleged disloyalty during the Civil War, and during a third, non-consecutive stint in the House, he was officially censured for using unparliamentary language against a fellow member. Subsequently elected governor, he exacerbated the split in his party over the issue of free silver. Later, he was an unsuccessful third-party candidate for governor and served as legal counsel for an accused conspirator in the murder of one of his opponents after the contest. His client was convicted. Talk about a rough-and-tumble political career! As always, I look forward to addressing your comments. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 16:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Captions that are complete sentences should end in periods
Images themselves are unproblematic, licensing seems fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Query: I noticed that John Y. Brown has his birth and death dates in his article title. This is something that is a bit alien to me on Wikipedia as usually we use proffessions such as writer, politician, scientist etc, etc... to differentiate between people of the same name. As it so happens we have 4 people, FOUR PEOPLE, with practically the same name that have been in almost identical positions in Kentucky (talk about inbreeding) however the more recent politicians all have either Sr., Jr., or III after there names. So my question is this would it be possible to remove the dates in brackets from the article title and just keep the disambiguation link at the top of the page for people who are searching for the other politicians? --Kuzwa (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, I'd respectfully ask that you keep your comments about inbreeding to yourself. In the first place, it is insulting, and in the second place, this article explicitly mentions that this John Y. Brown is not related to the others; he is simply their namesake. The others, of course, have a grandfather-father-son relationship, and the naming in this case is not uncommon at all, even in locales where it's less common to see jokes about inbreeding.

Regarding the naming of the article, it wasn't my choice; that's how it was when I started work on the article. That said, I can't think of one that is necessarily better. Dropping the vital dates implies that this article is the primary topic for John Y. Brown, which is not the case, imo. John Y. Brown (governor) is insufficient because both the subject and John Y. Brown, Jr. were governors; John Y. Brown (congressman) is also ambiguous, as both the subject and John Y. Brown, Sr. were members of the House of Representatives. John Y. Brown (politician) and John Y. Brown (Kentucky) are also out for obvious reasons. That means that about all we are left with is something like John Y. Brown (19th century), which is just as bad as what we have now. I'm open to suggestions, though. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments moved to talk page

Support per standard disclaimer. Looks good. - Dank (push to talk) 21:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 1b,c~~Comments~~:

What was he doing from 1861 until 1866? The narrative is a little light on that point and there's the alleged 'disloyalty' but no information about what he was doing to be disloyal. Kirk (talk) 13:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources seem to say. The NGA claims he enlisted in the Confederate Army, but no other source mentions that. NGA is known to miss from time to time, so I consider that unlikely. Following the war, many former Confederate soldiers were elected to office in Kentucky, and their Confederate service was usually seen as a qualification, not a problem. If he had served, his contemporaries would have no doubt trumpeted it from the heavens. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I think you need to figure this out - well-educated 26 year-olds not serving in some fashion sounds significantly omitted to me. I think you at least need to include that claim - your opinion makes sense as well but do you have a citation you can use? If you need a source you can't get let me know and I can see if I can help. Kirk (talk) 19:39, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have contacted User:Spacini, who is a published Kentucky historian. He is checking with a professor in Henderson, where Brown was during the war, to see if he can come up with anything. I'm not far from Henderson myself, so hopefully I'll be able to access anything he comes up with. Spacini opines: "Given [Brown's] second marriage in 1860, which produced eight children, I suspect that he simply attempted to remain neutral, raised his family, and practiced law." Based on what I've turned up about Brown and others related to him and the fact that there is no obvious mention of his activities in the usual places, I agree with Spacini's conclusion. Hopefully, his friend will turn up something more concrete soon. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out (page 102, 345) - not sure it answers the NGA question, but at least it gives something in between 1861-1866.Kirk (talk) 16:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here's what Spacini and I have come up with so far. Powell says that Brown was in Elizabethtown practicing law before the war. Levin says he didn't move to Henderson until after the war, but the account from Stovepipe Johnson that you cite above calls Brown one of the city leaders of Henderson who greeted Johnson when he got there. A quick glance over the chronology shows that Johnson was in Henderson sometime between the Battle of Shiloh and the Newburgh Raid, which would put it sometime in early 1862. There is also this idea mentioned by the NGA that he was a cavalry colonel at some point, but this receives no elaboration anywhere else and is quite unlikely. However, Robert Ireland does explicitly state that Brown became disenchanted with the Union and held Confederate sympathies throughout most of the war, which would be consistent with his welcoming Johnson to Henderson and the Congress' refusal to seat in him in 1867. Apparently, the record of his activities during this period is scarce and contradictory. I can add a footnote stating such to the article, but it seems unlikely that we will have a definitive answer. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this answers my original questions. Put in where he lived, what he was doing and the NGA Cavalry Colonel part with the citation, along with his meetings with confederates and then put your concerns with the sources in some notes.Kirk (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Switching to oppose. Kirk (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its closer now but the note needs citations; I'll check back tomorrow. Kirk (talk) 14:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I might be able to cite the part about Confederate service being a good thing in Kentucky politics (or I might not; haven't looked for one yet). Not sure how to cite that there are sources that don't mention his service, and no published source explicitly says that the claim is dubious; they just don't mention it at all. This is just my observation (and Spacini's, who is a published historian) from being more familiar than most with this subject. I could just make the note say "Some sources claim Brown served as a cavalry colonel during the war, but provide no elaboration. Most sources make no mention of this service, however." Would that suffice? Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The NGA says he was a confederate cavalry colonel; its a reliable source you can cite. Since you did enough research to find some holes, put the speculation stuff in notes and if one or more sources says something else specific, cite the specific difference in the note. If a lot of sources don't mention something, instead of an inline citation you could just mention the author's name(s) but I actually don't think there's a policy on this exception. Most editors pick the thing that is cited more in the article and the dubious thing in the note, so in the note put the colonel stuff. Avoid weasel words like 'Most sources' or 'Some sources', be specific. I'm bothered a half dozen historians and their editors all thought his civil war service (or lack thereof) was an optional part of their biographies! Kirk (talk) 00:42, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comments

Bibliography: For the first entry, the article title is "Brown, John Young, (1835 - 1904)" and this format should be used.
Be consistent with the citation formats for refs with multiple authors. For instance there is "Hughes, Schaefer, and Williams", but also "Tapp" instead of "Tapp and Klotter".

Otherwise the sources look reliable and the formats are all OK. Spotchecks not possible. Brianboulton (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both fixed. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead comments. There are definitely some problems with the article's lead.

Which state did Brown represent during his first term in the HoR? It is conceivable that he may have represented one state before moving to Kentucky.
"He was first elected to the House in 1859, despite his own protests that he did not yet meet the constitutional age requirement." What age was that?
The first paragraph of the lead seems intent on explaining curious yet somewhat trivial details about Brown's congressional career. What did he actually do while serving in the HoR?
"Having already alienated the free silver faction of his party, he backed "Goldbug" candidate Cassius M. Clay Jr. for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 1895. However, the death of Brown's teenage daughter in 1894 and the murder of his son by the husband of the son's adulterous lover in 1895 ended his interest in the gubernatorial race and his own senatorial ambitions." The rest of the lead is in chronological order. Why does this break the continuity? Also problematic is the massive number of details being crammed into the second sentence. I suggest rephrasing to "Having already alienated the free silver faction of his party, he backed "Goldbug" candidate Cassius M. Clay Jr. for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 1895. However, the deaths of two of his children ended his interest in the gubernatorial race and his own senatorial ambitions."
"Republican William S. Taylor won the election by a small margin, but after considerable legal wrangling, he was unseated, and Goebel was declared the winner. Goebel was shot..." It seems a bit silly to have a sentence in the lead that mentions two people who aren't Brown. I suggest trimming all of this down to simply "After eventually being declared the winner of the election, Goebel was shot..."
"Powers was convicted by a partisan jury, but later pardoned by Governor Augustus E. Willson." This statement is not supported by the body of the article.

--Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.