Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/James Hogun

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

James Hogun

Nominator(s): Cdtew (talk)

Ah, the last of this series (of which I'm sure everyone is tired by now) that will be passing through A-Class. I have sincerely appreciated everyone's helpful critiques and thoughtful reviews, and will appreciate help again on this general. Virtually unknown before the revolution, James Hogun rose to become a (Revolutionary War-era) "community organizer" to a general in a very short time. Not too aristocratic or distant from his (presumed) roots, Hogun refused to be paroled after being captured at Charleston in 1780, and died in a prison camp set up in the salt marshes around Charleston Harbor. Not much is known of his early life, and though his service during the war was commendable, his writings in the main don't survive. Very few modern sources discuss Hogun with any real seriousness, but several older ones have put together probably as much as we can possibly know about his life. I feel that I've put together those sources and brought this article to the highest level of detail I can. I look forward to your comments. Cdtew (talk) 15:52, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Support Comments: G'day, I made a couple of minor tweaks, but not a lot stood out for me. I only have a couple of comments:

• "The journey was arduous, and endured one of the coldest, harshest winters in recent memory." Who endured this?
• "File:Thomas Burke of North Carolina.jpg": as it is relying on age to prove it is PD, the image description page probably should provide some detail about the date it was created. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Quick Comment Just to reiterate Rupert's image check and to say that "met his demise" is surely an unwelcome euphemism, either "was interned" and/or "died" would be preferable I think. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for your short comments guys. My responses are below:

• @AustralianRupert: Changed the wording to "and Hogun's brigade endured"
• The file is a tricky one. The page at the source says that the date and author are unknown. I'm in a pickle about this one. I've called the State archives, and they're unsure of its exact provenance. I suppose my best course of action is removal - which sucks, because this article is already devoid of useful images.

• Yes, that's unfortunate, but I think it for the best. I've got no concerns about it being added again if something can be found about its publication. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

• @Grandiose: I've changed it to the simpler "died". Cdtew (talk) 15:23, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

---

Commentary:

Early life: Link to American Revolution instead of American Revolutionary War makes it seem he stayed obscure even unto death. His early death, before the full effects of the Revolution were recognized, makes the linkage to the war a more relevant one.

Initial command: Link to "additional regiments" could be useful if it could be more exactly targeted. A #Third establishment, 1777-1784 addition to the cite would take the reader to the right spot. As it now stands, the reader is left to sift through a 4,000 word article to find the term. That rather defeats the easy reference attributes of linkage.

In interests of increased clarity, suggest "sufficient weapons" in place of "sufficient armaments." The simpler word gives a more pointed meaning to the phrase.

Promotion and Philadelphia: The article to which Commandant links does not seem to offer an explanation of Arnold's function in Philadelphia. None of the U.S. academies yet existed, and I see no evidence that Philly was either a military training establishment or a prison camp. Perhaps a sentence or two explaining the Commandant's function could be added.

Southern campaign: The sentence "The journey was arduous, and Hogun's brigade endured one of the coldest, harshest winters in recent memory." would probably be more effective if rephrased. I can only assume they marched, as their method of movement was not specified, so "march" would add the unconscious connotations of wearisome walking. "memory" seems an inadequate referent here; perhaps "years", instead?

Support Having picked some mighty fine nits above, I end by saying, Good show. The cites are all good. I made one minor change to eliminate a typo, but the text is well-written. Coverage seems as complete as the resources allow. I see it as A Class even without my suggested changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgejdorner (talk • contribs) 20:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I will address all of your comments shortly. Thanks for your support! Cdtew (talk) 03:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

@Georgejdorner: I've made your changes here. Let me know if you see anything else. Also, I added a signature line for you, which was likely inadvertently left off. Cdtew (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

• CommentsSupport
  • No dab links [1] (no action req'd).
  • External links all check out [2] (no action req'd).
  • All images have Alt Text [3] (no action req'd).
  • The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with reference consolidation (no action req'd).
  • Image review completed above (no action req'd).
  • The Earwig Tool reveal no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing [4] (no action req'd).
  • No duplicate links per WP:REPEATLINK (no action req'd).
  • In the lead this seems needlessly long: "Hogun then advanced in rank again when he was promoted to the rank of brigadier general in 1779. The matter of Hogun's promotion caused a controversy in the Continental Congress due to the fact that several congressmen and the North Carolina General Assembly wished to see Thomas Clark of North Carolina promoted instead of Hogun." Consider instead something like: "Hogun was promoted to the rank of brigadier general in 1779; however, this caused a controversy in the Continental Congress due to the fact that several congressmen and the North Carolina General Assembly wished to see Thomas Clark of North Carolina promoted instead of Hogun."
  • This is a little repetitive: "Hogun was in command of North Carolina's line brigade during the Siege of Charleston in the spring of 1780, which ended in the surrender of all but one of North Carolina's regiments of regular infantry, and the surrender of more than 5,000 Patriot soldiers under Major General Benjamin Lincoln." Surrender twice in the same sentence, perhaps reword?
  • I accept that little is known about Hogun's early life and that due to this the "early life" section is pretty short. I notice though that you list Ireland as his place of birth in the infobox, but it isn't mentioned in the article. Might this be added here with a reference?
  • " Initially, the regiment had some difficulty organizing after several of that unit's officers delayed their military work in order to take care of their personal affairs." Consider more simply: " Initially, the regiment had some difficulty organizing after several officers delayed their military work in order to take care of their personal affairs." (you repeat this phrase a few times)
  • "While commanding the regiment, Hogun participated in the battles of Brandywine and Germantown, and was present at Valley Forge in the winter of 1777–78." Who was he fighting (some of our readers might not know)?
  • "Hogun found the task to be distasteful, but his men totally lacked sufficient weapons to allow them to serve as a combat unit until approximately 400 muskets were requisitioned for them.", consider more simply: "Hogun found the task distasteful, but his men lacked sufficient weapons to allow them to serve as a combat unit until approximately 400 muskets were requisitioned for them." ("to be" and "totally" are redundant).
  • "His promotion came in part as a result of the "distinguished intrepidity" that he had exhibited at Germantown..." the word "that" is redundant also. Consider more simply: "His promotion came in part as a result of the "distinguished intrepidity" he had exhibited at Germantown..." (minor nitpick)
  • "That surrender led to the loss of all but one of the regiments of the North Carolina Line then in existence, entirely depriving that state of regular, non-militia soldiers." Redundant language here too. Consider more simply: "That surrender led to the loss of all but one of the regiments of the North Carolina Line then in existence, depriving that state of regular, non-militia soldiers."
  • "Rather than allowing himself to be paroled, Hogun requested that he be interned at the British prison camp at Haddrel's Point on Point Pleasant..." redundant "that".
  • "Soldiers at Haddrel's Point were subjected to harsh conditions, were denied permission to fish for much-needed food, and were threatened with deportation from South Carolina." Consider more simply: "Soldiers at Haddrel's Point were subjected to harsh conditions, denied permission to fish for much-needed food, and threatened with deportation from South Carolina."
  • Do we know what Hogun died of? Anotherclown (talk) 04:44, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

• @Anotherclown: I have addressed all of your comments here, and will be happy to address any further comments you may have. A couple of specific things for you, and a few questions:

• Hogun's cause of death and burial place are unknown; the sources state merely that his "health declined" during that winter; I imagine it was disease or malnutrition; Clark speculated way back in 1906 that Hogun may have been about 58-60 years old when he died (in a round-about way, by stating that he believed Hogun was "past the middle of life" when he got married in 1751, ie: 1781-1751= 30 x 2 = 60 OR 1780-1751= 29 x 2 = 58), so I could throw that in as added speculation about the cause of death. Let me know your thoughts on that, since some of it is arguably OR (although math-based OR, so easily traceable).
• What are your thoughts about whether this article is even worth nominating at FAC? I can see how if I were to nominate it, at ~9 sources and 16-17 footnotes and 12 short paragraphs long, there would be an argument that it's a subject that just won't ever be FAC-worthy because of lack of sources. On the other hand, I figure if I've written a comprehensive article about his life including every encyclopedic piece of information I can find, that sounds FAC-worthy.
• As an addendum to that question, do you think if I beefed the article up with contextual facts it would be more FAC-worthy? Like, if I discussed what was happening and why at certain points where information is lacking? Again, I could see FAC reviewers pooh-poohing the use of contextual facts that aren't substantially describing the life and actions of the article's subject.

Thanks again for your help! Cdtew (talk) 14:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Gday. Changes look fine so I've added my support. Happy to accept that we just don't know when he was born and leave it at that. In response to your questions: 1) I think probably best to stay away from anything that might be considered OR. 2) I actually don't have much experience at FAC (never nominated an article there actually and only reviewed twice) so I'm afraid I really couldn't give you any meaningful advice. Perhaps approach one of our other editors with a bit more knowledge in this area? Anotherclown (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. - Dank (push to talk) 13:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.