Talk:Henry Martyn/Archive 1

Saints banner and category
Based on this individual being included in the Calendar of saints (Anglican Church of Australia), I am adding the Category:Anglican saints and the Saints WikiProject banner to this article. I am awaiting reliable sources which can be used to add the content to the article. John Carter 15:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Tokat Epitaph
In the stone depôt of the Tokat museum is a stout marble obelisk. Inscriptions have been removed from two sides. Persian and English inscriptions survive at the base of the remaining sides. There is no name but sufficient information to connect the stone with Martyn. The English follows: CHAPLAIN to the EAST INDIA COMPANY / Born at Truro, in England, Februray 18, 1781 / Died at Tocat, October 16, 1812 / He laboured for many years in the East striving to / benefit mankind both in this world and that to come / He translated the Holy Scriptures into Hindostanee Persian / and preached the God and Saviour of whom they testify / He will long be remembered in the East where he was known as / A MAN OF GOD. Aramgar 03:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Template creep
For months Template:Protestant missions to India has been attached to this article. While Rev. Martyn does not appear on the template, a link labeled "more missionaries" links to List of Protestant missionaries in India where he does appear. I would prefer to keep the former template as its narrow scope provides far more useful information than the more general Template:Indian christianity. Aramgar (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a new project and a new portal focusing on Christianity in India. There is a new Nav Box as well. Project creep, portal creep, and "content creep" not withstanding, this article is an important part of the new project. Perhaps the two Nav Boxes will be merged in the future. For now I am restoring the project-supported Box that, in fact, links to the article, unlike the one you restored. -- SECisek (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would eagerly await "content creep" at Henry Martyn. The cleanup banner has been at the top of the article for months now. Since he is important to your project, you ought to focus on bringing the text up to encyclopedic standards. Aramgar (talk) 01:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, The projects exist to identify, edit and improve articles just like this one. I agree and work will begin. -- SECisek (talk) 01:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

XIX century sources
"I have access to these; others may as well. Why eliminate a primary source from bibliography?"

Sometimes, during a GA review, the presence of older sources in Further reading or References sections will bias an editor against passing the article. It depends on the editor. I will leave them in for now and see what the GA editor says. If you have sources I do not, is there anything you can add and cite before the review? -- SECisek (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * These both seem to be available via Google books. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

GA on hold
Hi there, I have reviewed this article against the good article criteria and although I am not quite prepared to pass the article for GA immediately, I don't think there is a long way to go. I have listed below the principle problems which prevent this article from achieving GA status and I have also appended a list of other comments which, whilst they are not essential for GA, may help in the future development of the article. The article now has seven days to address these issues, and should the contributors disagree with my comments then please indicate below why you disagree and suggest a solution, compromise or explanation. Further time will be granted if a concerted effort is being made to address the problems, and as long as somebody is genuinely trying to deal with the issues raised then I will not fail the article. I am aware that my standards are quite high, but I feel that an article deserves as thorough a review as possible when applying for GA and that a tough review process here is an important stepping stone to future FAC attempts. Please do not take offence at anything I have said, nothing is meant personally and maliciously and if anyone feels aggrieved then please notify me at once and I will attempt to clarify the comments in question. Finally, should anyone disagree with my review or eventual decision then please take the article to WP:GAR to allow a wider selection of editors to comment on the issues discussed here. Well done on the work so far.

Issues preventing promotion
(These issues must be satisfactorily addressed, in the article itself or here, before GA promotion can go ahead)
 * "He was remembered for his courage, selflessness and his religious devotion." - this appears in the lead and in the final paragraph, please clarify among whom he was remembered for these things (i.e. the British Anglican community or the Indian Anglican community)
 * "When a disaster in Cornwall" - can you be more specific? What disaster?
 * "in spite of interruptions and threats." - from who?
 * "an unsuccessful journey to Tabriz" - why was this unsuccessful?
 * "place to place by a thoughtless Tatar guide" - replace "a thoughtless" with "their", its too much commentary on the guide's motives


 * Your suggestions challenged me to find more material. This guy lived a long time ago - almost 200 years ago - he worked for only six years, and he died before his 32nd birthday. There isn't much on him out there. I still managed to find another source or two, enough to shed some light on some of your questions. I really enjoy editing these old British Imperial guys, your navy man, this missionary. What neat stuff! -- Secisek (talk) 10:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Other comments
(These comments are not essential to passing GAN)
 * Has there ever been anything negative written about him? Its quite possible there hasn't, but at the moment the article looks a little one-sided in his favour.
 * The four sources in further reading would be great resources for the article and I recommend their inclusion. There is no problem with using 19th century sources, provided that any modern commentary that exists is discussed as well.
 * I know very little about Anglicanism, but what is the process by which a person becomes a saint? The word saint is not really used in the article, and its only the infobox and categories which indicate that he is a saint. This could be clearer in the text.

In all, this is very close to GA quality and only the minor clarifications above are required to qualify it. A very nice job, congratulations.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Passed
I'm happy to pass this now, although I am still not fully clear on the Corish disaster - what kind of financial disaster? Mine collapse? Dodgy investments? Bad day at the races? It should be clearer. (As mentioned elsewhere, in future please don't strikethrough my comments, leave that for me to do once I am satisified).--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Must have been at Anne. I have been here for awhile. As for the Cornish disaster google turns up nothing for 1803 cornish disaster. DNB DID say it was a financial disaster which is a leg up on just a general disater. I'll keep searching. -- Secisek (talk) 10:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * That was at Anne, I should have made that more clear.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Protestant missions to India
I must agree with User:Brian0324 in my preference for the Template:Protestant missions to India over the more general Template:Indian Christianity. Moreover, significant discussions about what is or is not included in the article Henry Martyn ought to take place here at Talk:Henry Martyn not at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian Christianity. I have restored Brian0374's correctives. Please discuss future changes of template here. Thanks, Aramgar (talk) 21:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a proposal to merge the templates. Please participate rather than outright reverting. Did you learn nothing at Prester John? -- Secisek (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm going to comment further about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian Christianity, because I think that there are some bigger issues. Thanks.Brian0324 (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That was my whole point. The above editor did not realize we are again discussing formating across a number of articles and not having a "significant discussions about what is or is not included in the article". -- Secisek (talk) 00:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Excuse me. Your assumption is incorrect. I have watched with interest the discussion unfolding over the last few days at Template talk:Indian Christianity. Brian0324's problems with the template design and the name of your Wikiproject have merit. I, however, am interested in what is or is not included in the article. I believe that Template:Protestant missions to India is better suited for this article. It is focused and useful. Aramgar (talk) 00:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You did not give off that impression when you reverted an edit in the midst of a discussion that you have been following "with interest". Forgive me for asking you to assume good faith. Brian's problems are not with the name of -as you put it- "my" Wikiproject, or with -ahem- "my" template. Part of the process we are in involves establishing coneventions for Portal:Christianity in China, which is already under attack. My inital revert to User talk:Brian0324 alterations  did not take place in a bubble, he and I have been discussing these portals on and off for months, the two of us are working together with several other editors, as well. My edit summary pointed to the place where the discussion had begun and you responded in a less than cooperative way to the suggestion of joining the wider discussion. Again, forgive me if I assumed anything by your behaviour, please join in, and let's see where this goes. -- Secisek (talk) 01:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Secisek: I followed Brian0324's criticisms here of the image at the top of the template. I have understood from his comment here that he has valid concerns with the use of the phrase "Indian Christianity" in the name of the wikiproject with which you are affiliated and on the template for which you are largely responsible. All of this is of interest to me primarily as it pertains to affixing the appropriate navigational template to this article. I noticed that Brian0324 shared my priorities with respect to this page and that you immediately reverted him, once again directing all discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian Christianity. I appreciate the work you have done to bring Henry Martyn to good article status but feel that you are ignoring my concerns, and now perhaps those of another editor, about the value of the broad template over the more narrowly focused one on this article.


 * The Template:Indian Christianity seems to me an unwieldy assemblage of disparate elements, elements to be sure that intersect with Christianity and the subcontinent, but that otherwise have very little connection with one another. The Template:Protestant missions to India seems to me a focused collection of useful and related links, the sort of thing I would find interesting if I had stumbled upon Henry Martyn by accident (which is how I got here, so to speak). Please allow the discussion of which template is more appropriate for this article to take place here. I would happily comment on any proposed template merge in the appropriate place, provided the discussion is conducted in a transparent fashion. Aramgar (talk) 03:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

We can discuss which template to include on this page here, but one of them probably will not exist by the end of the week, so why bother. I am in no way ignoring the concerns of Brian0324, who I have been working closely with throughout the establishment of the two portals - there may still be more to come. His concerns with the name and image of the Indian project stem largely from attacks (real and potential) on the new Christianity in China portal that he and I set up. He has raised some very good points that we are in the process of discussing. If your concerns are the same as his, you can rest assured they are not being ignored. If you have been following this from the start, I apologise again, but your reaction still makes it appear as if you are late to this discussion. You certainly did not see fit to weigh in on this as the portals and projects were being developed.

I think you may have overreacted to the change in navboxs (again) without fully understanding what has been going on. After the Prester John misunderstanding there were apologies issued, followed by a pledge to procede with more caution in the future, rather than snapping to "restore...correctives". Perhaps you missed that outcome. Never the less, Brian0324 and I are working together on this, along with other editors and your input is welcome. If you have been offended by anything I have said or done, please accept my apologies and in the future, take a look at what is at work before snapping to revert. -- Secisek (talk) 05:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW: To suggest that I am largely responsible for either the project, the portal, or the template would be flatering - but it is not so. I did not set up the former two and the current template bares little likeness to the one I hastily slapped together for the purpose of discussion.-- Secisek (talk) 05:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)