Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/William Henry Harrison/archive1

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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC) [1].

William Henry Harrison

edit
Notified: Charles Edward, Hoppyh, WikiProject Biography/Politics and government, WikiProject Virginia, WikiProject International relations, WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Politics/American politics, WikiProject U.S. Congress, WikiProject United States Presidents, WikiProject University of Pennsylvania 2021-09-23

Review section

edit

I am nominating this featured article for review because... Hello, I gave a notice on the 23 September 2021, but nothing much has changed since then. I think the article is quite good except for a few unsourced pieces of text. I think it would be good to see if it still meets the FA criteria. Sahaib3005 (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sahaib3005, just to clarify, are the issues you posted on the talk page the entirety of your concerns with this article? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:07, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Nikkimaria, no there is quite a few bits of unsourced text in the article. For example in the death and funeral section "On March 26, 1841, Harrison became ill with cold-like symptoms. His doctor, Thomas Miller, prescribed rest; Harrison was unable to rest during the day for the crowds in the White House, and that night chose instead to host a party with his army friends.", there is no source.Sahaib3005 (talk) 18:13, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be no problem here. The citation (currently #121) is at the end of the next sentence. Let me know. Hoppyh (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for improving the article. I don’t see any more problems with the article (though other editors might). Sahaib3005 (talk) 14:53, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: After a quick skim I think this article is salvageable. There's some uncited sentences and paragraphs that need to be resolved. I also think some short paragraphs can be merged, particularly in the "Legacy" section. If someone is willing to address these, I am happy to conduct a more thorough review and copyedit. Z1720 (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have addressed the specific items of initial concern listed on the talk p.; I'll be glad to address other items as I'm able. Hoppyh (talk) 21:53, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will be attempting a copyedit including the unsourced material issues. Hoppyh (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoppyh: Please post here when the copyedit is complete, and other editors will review your work. Z1720 (talk) 15:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My copyedit continues and I will advise when complete—probably another day or two. Hoppyh (talk) 13:41, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: My copyedit is substantially completed; glad to help further as needed. I’m continuing to look for improvements that can be made. Hoppyh (talk) 16:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this version, unformatted citations, bare URLs, and sources flagged as unreliable by Headbomb’s script. Citation cleanup work needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:29, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: I'm glad to work on these, though it's not my forte. Perhaps an example or two of corrections needed would instruct me. I'd appreciate the help. Hoppyh (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure … I will add them to Hog Farm’s list below, to keep in one place. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A source-text integrity check should probably be conducted if possible, to make sure that the issues found at Talk:Battle of Tippecanoe are not present in this similar article, which also uses similar sources and has some similarities in the edit history. From a quick check of reference reliability:

  • " "Harrison dies of pneumonia"." - history.com is considered to be generally unreliable (due to publishing fringe junk unrelated to this subject)
    Replaced. Hoppyh (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Milligan, Fred (2003). Ohio's Founding Fathers. iUniverse, Inc. pp. 107–108. ISBN 978-0-595-29322-3." - this is self-published
    Replaced. Hoppyh (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Coincidence or Something More?". About.com. Retrieved June 9, 2008." - is about.com reliable enough for FA? I'd recommend replacing the ref
    Replaced. Hoppyh (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • " "Statue of William Henry Harrison - Cincinnati, Ohio - American Guide Series on Waymarking.com". www.waymarking.com. Retrieved July 28, 2016." - Probably a better source than waymarking should be used for FA purposes
    Replaced. Hoppyh (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't have time for a deeper look into sourcing right now, but I also see instances of the same ref formatted differently and used separately, such as the Thirty-One days historynet.com source. Hog Farm Talk 17:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reiterating what Hog Farm said, a thorough source-to-text integrity check should be conducted here, for more reasons than those mentioned by HF. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sample of unformatted citation (also red-flagged by HeadBomb’s script as not reliable)

"Harrison dies of pneumonia".
Fixed. Hoppyh (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sample of bare URL in citation:

https://www.thedp.com/article/2017/01/william-henry-harrison-history accessed August 24, 2021
Fixed I think. Hoppyh (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HarvRef error:

Borneman, Walter R. (2005). 1812: The War That Forged a Nation. New York: HarperCollins (Harper Perennial). ISBN 978-0-06-053113-3. Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFBorneman2005.
Removed. On further reading list. Hoppyh (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This, for example, is a book, but is lacking full citation info (eg, Publisher and ISBN)

Peck, J. M. (June 4, 1851). The Jefferson-Lemen Compact. Retrieved March 28, 2010.
Done. Hoppyh (talk) 22:38, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Besides those mentioned by Hog Farm, also flagged by HeadBomb’s script is the about.com source mentioned by HogFarm; about.com is WP:SPS, and is reliable if reliability can be established for the specific author of the about.com article.
These are samples only; all citations need to be checked. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:33, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am initiating a citation cleanup from the beginning. Hoppyh (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have completed a review and edit of the article's citations, as well as the bibliography and further reading. Hoppyh (talk) 22:24, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Barnhart Riker is not listed in the Bibliography, and is causing HarvRef errors throughout: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Barnhart & Riker 1971, pp. 409–10. Harv error: link from CITEREFBarnhartRiker1971 doesn't point to any citation.
Fixed. Hoppyh (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peckham is listed in External links, but should be Further reading. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:03, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Hoppyh (talk) 00:38, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Borneman, listed in Bibliography, is not used, and is returning a Harv Ref error (see Category:Harv and Sfn template errors, you can install this script to detect errors):
    Borneman, Walter R. (2005). 1812: The War That Forged a Nation. New York: HarperCollins (Harper Perennial). ISBN 978-0-06-053113-3. Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFBorneman2005. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:08, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Moved to Further Reading. Hoppyh (talk) 01:08, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hoppyh; all of the citation formatting issues I raised are addressed. I have not looked at anything else on this article, and it’s unlikely that I will. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, it looks as though all the concerns raised thus far have been addressed. Hoppyh (talk) 21:32, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to give this some source-text integrity checks. It looks like I can get Owens from the local library, will try to get it tonight. Hog Farm Talk 21:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conducting sourcing checks at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/William Henry Harrison/archive1, some problems noted. Hog Farm Talk 08:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll be glad to look at them and try to solve. Hoppyh (talk) 14:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Commending the excellent use of the talk page by our considered and responsive Hog Farm, as this is just the sort of review that does not need to be conducted on the main FAR page, but can be summarized back to here once it is completed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Worked all the way through the cites to Owens. Anyone have ready access to any of the other sources? Because there were a number of issues revealed in spot-checking. Hog Farm Talk 22:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All I ever had was Cleaves. Unfortunate there is not more interest here, but I live in a glass house in that respect. Hoppyh (talk) 12:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Several of them are linked to archive.org; have you checked all of those, Hoppyh? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have noticed that link and I’m glad you mentioned it–very useful I imagine, especially for older folks like myself. But to answer your question, I have to a great extent limited my work here to what’s already in the article, at least until HF started the source checking. I’m growing a bit unsure how much more I should do here, without the benefit of more editors. Hoppyh (talk) 16:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the dilemma; perhaps someone will check source check all of those archive links, considering that Hog Farm is finding concerns. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SandyGeorgia: Could you instruct me using an example? Hoppyh (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoppyh: Sure, I will put that on the talk page here (with my apologies for not being able to help out). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will initiate a source-to-text review for the Gugin citations. I will attempt to fix and use the edit summary to note location. Hoppyh (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To update, Gugin review complete, also Burr, now have Carnes in process. See archive link above provided by Hog Farm. Hoppyh (talk) 14:16, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoppyh: - Are you done with the Owens items? I'll return it back to the library soon, if so. Hog Farm Talk 17:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Hoppyh (talk) 18:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hold in FAR, slow but steady progress being made. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hog Farm indicated he may get access to additional sources over Thanksgiving and if so I will be glad to respond to whatever that reveals. Other than that, the only additional source checking I can think of is to perhaps check those citations with on line links. Let me know if there is other work needed here. Hoppyh (talk) 18:20, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the Taylor source is really from 1899, it should be public domain and accessible through Google books or something. Hog Farm Talk 18:28, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Got it–I’ll do the check. Hoppyh (talk) 18:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Hoppyh (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To update, I’ve had some success accessing additional sources; results are posted on the talk page here, and we’ll keep at it as time (and turkey) allow. On a side note, it happens that Harrison has a connection to Thanksgiving, as his birthplace at Berkeley Plantation claims to be a site of one of the first Thanksgivings in the country. Check it out.Hoppyh (talk) 17:19, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As further update on our audit of sources, I think I have done all I can. It appears there are six sources remaining unaudited, for which I have no access: Barnhart/Riker, Bolivar, Cleaves, Collins, Funk, and Greiff; 19 citations are linked to these. I will be glad to help further if other issues arise. Hoppyh (talk) 01:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I might be able to get Barnhart/Riker and a different edition of Cleaves from a library, possibly tomorrow (no guarantees, though). Collins I can probably get from a nearby library, but it's a bit of a drive that I often don't have time for. Hog Farm Talk 16:37, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will try where possible to replace the sources for the above citations in lieu of finding the refs we don't have access to. Hoppyh (talk) 23:31, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cites to Funk and Barnhart/Riker have been replaced–I have moved those sources from Bibliography to Further Reading section. Hoppyh (talk) 02:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't able to get to the libraries so far this week, hopefully can get there soon. Hog Farm Talk 02:34, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, the only sources which remain unchecked are Bolivar, Cleaves, Collins, and Greiff, making up nine citations. Hoppyh (talk) 19:59, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I'm not concerned about the citations to Greiff, based on the subject matter they are supporting. Hog Farm Talk 20:03, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have exhausted my avenues of access/replacement as to the remaining 9 citations. Hoppyh (talk) 15:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Was able to check Cleaves and Collins, although I had to use a different edition of Cleaves that appears to be much longer (stuff cited as being in the 150s appeared to roughly correlate to the 340s). Hog Farm Talk 23:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that some issues were flagged up checking those two. With Greiff not being a significant concern due to it just supporting the existence of statues, that just leaves the infrequently-used Bolivar. Hog Farm Talk 19:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that all the issues flagged have been sufficiently addressed. Hoppyh (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure that "Leaving it in for now." in response to a problem passage sourced to Collins is fully addressing the problem. Hog Farm Talk 14:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Text and cite replaced. I’d like to confirm wife’s return from Ohio to his deathbed but need to research that. Hoppyh (talk) 15:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. She never made it.Hoppyh (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a substantial edit, adding sourced detail in the Death and Funeral section, as appropriate for this aspect of the article. Hoppyh (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: It’s been a couple weeks since we did anything here and the original review nominator has long since indicated his departure from this. I guess someone will weigh in about where this goes at some point. I’m glad to return here if needed. Hoppyh (talk) 21:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hoppyh; I’m not sure what might happen next here. Perhaps a Move to FARC is needed to get some !votes on where this article stands. It’s not clear to me if the source-to-text integrity issues are resolved, and I haven’t really engaged this FAR for that reason. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I'm about to enter a week-long wikibreak, so I won't be able to engage much here right now. Hog Farm Talk 14:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy your break; perhaps we can hold here for a week or two more then. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would say, between Hog Farm and myself, the article has undergone a fairly exhaustive source-to-text audit; I believe our notes bear that out. Hoppyh (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia and Hoppyh: - I've checked the web sources for three sections, and flagged up a bunch of failed verification or other problematic things. Most of the failed verification is tagged in the article, but more details are at the talk page of this FAR with the other spot-checks. I also found some instances where a RS web source cited includes negative information about Harrison that is not reflected in the article, I suspect that a few sections may be glossing over things (such as his performance as diplomat). I'm also concerned to the citations to Burr 1840 - this is a source written during the time Harrison was running for president on a log cabin platform, so "and he was hailed by many as a national hero" clearly needs a better source, and I'm suspicious of the entire paragraph talking about Harrison's simple farm life and decision not to run a still - we shouldn't be using a possibly-partisan source from when he was running on the log cabin platform to source such material. Hog Farm Talk 14:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia and Hog Farm: I’ll be glad to work on these. Hoppyh (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SandyGeorgia and Hog Farm: Burr is not my source here, but I come to his defense. Reference in Burr the preface and also pp. 290-291, where the author forthrightly addresses the potential allegation of timing and partisanship; he firmly denies bias and refers to the sources in his appendix. While not necessarily dispositive of the RS question, such an effort to dispel concern was rare at that time and level of sophistication, and the source is therefore worthy of some degree of reliability. Hoppyh (talk) 03:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The author verifies the information about the still with an address Harrison made to the Hamilton County Agricultural Society-see appendix. The appendix also includes reference to Harrison’s farm labors and poor circumstances, as well as his being responded to by colleagues and the public as a hero. (I don't personally find that surprising, inasmuch as he did seek and obtain the presidency.) I also have conducted a search on the internet of the author and I can find no entries which draw into question his objectivity in his book on Harrison. Hoppyh (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That said, I will endeavor to revise/omit text as needed to synchronize with the source. Certainly, if you identify negative info worthy of inclusion, let me know. Hoppyh (talk) 14:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will be going over the RS web site mentioned above–this is the Freehling work–which may have additional negative information for other sections of the article, and I will make textual revisions as appropriate, and note them on our archive. Hoppyh (talk) 16:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am confident I have gleaned all the material Freehling has to offer, both positive and negative. Hoppyh (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At this juncture, having made numerous additions and other revisions based on Freehling, I will again copyedit the article for typos, etc.. Hoppyh (talk) 15:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Work is still ongoing on talk. Hog Farm Talk 14:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Could we get an update on status? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nikkimaria - not much has changed. I last checked items on January 27 and left four comments (two bigger source-text integrity, one minor source-text, and one source reliability concern) and have received replies for one. Based on what I've looked at so far on the print sources and web sources, every single individual reference needs checked if possible, which is quite tedious and something I only want to do right now if there's going to be active fixes to the findings. And just now looking through at a couple web cites, I'm seeing that one spot that had already been fixed is still problematic because "He ran in the 1822 election for the United States House of Representatives, but lost to James W. Gazlay" is sourced to a source that says Harrison lost in 182 and a source that Gazlay won in 1822, neither article mentions both at the same time and there were multiple Ohio House of Reps elections in 1822 so this isn't properly sourced. So Move to FARC I guess. Hog Farm Talk 03:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Move to FARC, which will hopefully prompt broader engagement to the issues raised by Hog Farm. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:15, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

edit
Issues outstanding include verifiability and sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:14, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist some improvement but the source-text issue prevents it from meeting the FA criteria. (t · c) buidhe 03:43, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist has improved, but the verifiability and source-text issues really need a complete rewrite outside of the FAR process. Hog Farm Talk 14:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist; sad to see after so much work improvement, but this one didn't make it; much more work needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/William_Henry_Harrison/archive1&oldid=1089215866"