Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jonathan Wild

Jonathan Wild
Self nomination, and I promise not to argue with anyone who objects. While the approved A Tale of a Tub was the most comprehensive article I've written on Wikipedia, I always thought Jonathan Wild was the one that provided the best read and the most interesting text. Geogre 20:22, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support: riveting!--Bishonen 23:40, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Very interesting read. Zerbey 04:40, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support - minor quibble - does "his testimony was in connection with his criminal conspiracy" - presuambly this refers to Hitchens personally knowing 2000 professional thieves in London? If so, this is not entirely clear (to me at least - still being dense today). Object for now - this is an excellent read and I want to support; unfortunately, however, I have a few nit-picky points: (i) Section 2 says "Hitchens, the city's top policeman, would himself end at the gallows, and his testimony was in connection with his criminal conspiracy" (emphasis added) - perhaps I am being dense today, but what does the emphasised bit here mean?; (ii) there is some repetition in sections 2 and 3 ("Wild had an ingenious method. He ran a gang of thieves...", "Jonathan Wild's unique scheme was to operate a gang..."; (iii) the text is very light on wikilinks - playwrights, 1720s, corruption, apprentice, Mohocks, and many others could all be usefully wikilinked (of course, some may think the minimal linking an advantage...); (iv) section 4 ends "(see the reproduction of the gallows ticket, left)" - first, left-alignment is (in my experience) usually deprecated for layout, second, in my browser it is mainly above not left: I think the reference is unhelpful; (v) Wiki-style is to avoid headings starting "The" and Unnecessary Capitals In Headings; (vi) the references are outstandingly good, but I am surprised there are no "external links" or "see also"s.   -- ALoan (Talk) 14:46, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:45, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Response: I will make the changes.  Indeed, this morning I noticed the repetition in the text and resolved to change it.  In pieces, then:  i) I didn't want to go too far in this and digress onto Hitchens too much, but Howson reveals that Hitchens took bribes from thieves and was indicted (and hung) for essentially being corrupt, so the "criminal conspiracy" was somewhat literal: he was conspiring with his thieves; ii) Agreed, absolutely and will be corrected; iii) Will correct, and I even thought about researching and writing about the Mohocks, who made a stink at the time but are a relative footnote; iv) I wanted to vary the layout somewhat to prevent a sort of gallery running on one margin, but I will correct the textual reference; is left-alignment sufficient for objection, or would it be ok with just a correct reference?  I'm not in love with left align and only wanted to vary a bit; v) Did know know, will change, as I was under the reverse impression; vi) See also is possible, though I tend to think that the wikilinks function that way and personally don't do them.  As for external links, it's remarkable because, in fact, Wild is just flat out under-represented in his own right.  It's surprising.  Every 18th c. scholar knows about him, but Gerald Howson remains the only biographer who doesn't fictionalize.  He's a really difficult figure for research, being a criminal and probably the beneficiary of a cover-up by Walpole (Howson talks about court records that are complete except for Wild's statement, etc.).  The problem is that Howson is pretty much it, so all external links are either going to be about Defoe or Fielding or derived from Howson or Defoe.  I can probably find an e-text of Defoe's life of Wild.  I'll see what I can do.  (The best see-also is Jack Sheppard, probably.) Geogre 16:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Changes made. I hope the objections have been answered. Geogre 17:38, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'll check. The "see also" is not really for things that are already linked (rule of thumb is that other articles should only have wikilink per page) but really for tangentially relevant things that are not specifically mentioned (say [tries to think of a good example ... erm ...] Gallows humour).  -- ALoan (Talk) 17:48, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Second reply: To tell the truth, I honestly don't know more about Hitchens that I put up there.  Howson has only the bare fact that Hitchens was indicted for taking bribes and that he was hung.  He wasn't hung for knowing the thieves, but for letting them out of jail for pay.  Hitchens was trying to say, in his defence, that it was impossible to hold all the thieves: there were too many.  You had to let some out to get some in, and greasing palms was common.  In fact, Howson makes a great case for that being true, although he also talks about one method they had for relieving overcrowding: death.  Lots of prisoners died of starvation and disease while in jail.  It's a very frightening read.  (See also!  Just thought of one!  See also The Mint.) Geogre 18:11, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Support. An interesting read, too. Jeronimo 21:32, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Gdr 11:25, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)
 * Support ZayZayEM 04:11, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Really interesting., I have never seen anything about him before. Geogre should extend this by a few thousand words and publish it as a book. he would make a fortune Giano 10:49, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Knew nothing about this person but now I feel I know all I need. And I enjoyed reading it. Filiocht 08:23, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)