Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Carolina militia units in the American Revolution/archive1


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

The list was archived by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC).

List of North Carolina militia units in the American Revolution

 * Nominator(s): User:G._Moore Talk to G Moore 01:17, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

User:G._Moore is nominating this for a featured list because it is a comprehensive look at North Carolina militia units during the American Revolution. It contains an introduction and sortable list of the units and their first commander. It will be of interest to readers of the history of the American Revolution and early North Carolina history. Talk to G Moore 01:17, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

{{hidden/FC|headerstyle=background:#ccf;|contentstyle=border:1px #ccf solid; padding:10px;|header=Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:09, 23 December 2019 (UTC)|content=* Oppose - note 6: "References are contained in the individual brigade or regiment pages, as well as biography pages, where they have been created". Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, the references need to be in this article. There's quite a few issues with style, links, etc, which I will set out later, but the lack of refs is the big one. The article will never pass WP:FLC with a note that essentially says "you need to look in other articles to find the sources"...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Additional comments
 * "The following is a comprehensive list of known North Carolina militia units in the American Revolution that fought against the British" - FLs do not start with "this is a list", so find a way to create a better opening
 * "The size of brigades [....] were commanded" - grammar issue here
 * "In 1775, the Rowan County regiment was split on October 22, 1775" - don't need both "in 1775" and the exact date
 * Have fixed this User:G._Moore 13:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There seems to be no coherent order to the table - it isn't alphabetical, it isn't by date of formation. What is it based on?
 * The current order is the subordination of the unit. User:G._Moore  13:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * "Col Thomas Witmell, Thomas" - huh? There's a few like this.....
 * (have fixed these 13:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC) User:G._Moore
 * As mentioned above, the lack of references in the article is a 100% deal breaker. And to add to that, at least some of the content isn't even referenced in the relevant article, as the note claims.  At random I clicked on the link for Cumberland County Regiment and the article it took me to doesn't contain a reference to support the fact that Rutherford was its commander...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

References and sort order
User:G._Moore User talk:G._Moore  13:13, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The units, dates, and commanders all come from the references listed in the bibliography, e.g. Conner, Crow, Lewis, etc..  There are more detailed references in the linked articles when they exist.   I was struggling with the right way to reference a long list.  Does every entry in the list have to have its own reference?   I used a combination of all the references in the bibliography to develop the list.
 * The table can be sorted by each of the columns. I was not sure what the initial order needed to be if the table can be sorted--some units changed Brigade during the war.  The units are currently in the order of the units they were subordinated to.

(ec)
 * "Does every entry in the list have to have its own reference?" - yes, it does. It should be completely clear what the source of each specific piece of information in the article is.  So if the name, dates and commander of a specific unit are all sourced to one particular book, then that needs to be indicated on that row of the table.
 * There is now a reference column that contains the 147 references for the information in the table. I am currently check all the links to make sure they work.  User:G._Moore talk  13:48, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * While it is true that the table can be sorted on any of the columns, it should be presented in a logical fashion when readers first arrive on the article, not just at random. In this example I would personally suggest that the date of formation is the most logical order for initial sorting.  I don't understand what you mean when you say "The units are currently in the order of the units they were subordinated to", because the values in the subordination column are not grouped together - "North Carolina Militia", for example, is dotted all over the table...........
 * It is the North Carolina Militia Command, which has Brigades under it and Regiments under Brigades, with a few Independent units. They are grouped by the Brigade and alphabetical within Brigade.   Would it help if the Brigades are shaded in a common color?   User:G._Moore talk  13:48, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, that makes sense. No, I would avoid colour.  Coloured stripes just make a table look garish and also cause accessibility issues -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * HTH -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice. I am new to Wikipedia lingo.  what does HTH mean?  User:G._Moore talk  13:48, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hope that helps :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * BTW you don't need to put a name (Lewis, NCPedia, etc) for each ref to go against. Just do it like the first row (which I have just edited) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)}}


 * BTW what makes Lewis (carolana.com) a reliable source? It just seems to be some random guy's personal website...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * He has a book that documents his research and has put all of the information in the database that is online. I have compared his results to all of the other sources and have found it most accurate. He actually used some 50,000 sources to compile the information.  I added an intro to the bibliography about the work that has been done.  Whenever I see a discrepancy, I send him a note and he corrects it based on the original sources.  William S. Powell, a state historian in North Carolina, has produced an encyclopedia of NC history, much of what is now online in a cite called NCPEDIA.  Together, these have been my guides to NC Revolutionary History.  I found that having this in WikiPedia was really nice because it links to the other info in Wikipedia on NC and the Revolution.  Let me know if there is anything else that I should do to the list.  User:G._Moore User talk:G._Moore
 * I don't think that note above the bibliography is needed, and referring to the "heroic efforts" of historians definitely doesn't conform to WP:NPOV..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I took out the non-NPOV wording. I think the intro for the bibliography does add to the historical perspective on how we know about these units. It was not just a matter of copying from muster rolls and Tables of Organization.   I asked J.D. Lewis to review the page.  I put his comments on the Talk page. Is there anything more to do on this FL nomination?  User:G._Moore talk 18:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Per WP:SPS "Anyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert. That is why self-published material such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, content farms, internet forum postings, and social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."  Has Mr Lewis been published on the subject (by independent outlets - his books listed in the bibliography are self-published)?  Has he been cited in others' publications?  Trying to establish if he is regarded as an established expert on this subject rather than simply an avid amateur....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:04, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * J.D. Lewis's works are cited in the following journals, bibliographies, books, historical societies, public education curricula, and South Carolina County governments. His books are also available via Google books:



22:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * - Popping in the discussion review. I'm really not sure about Carolana.  I've been working on a GA review of William Woods Holden, and have concluded that a portion of Carolana's page mirrored the 2007 version of the Wikipedia page on the subject.  If it uses Wikipedia as a source, I don't see how it can be a WP:RS. Hog Farm (talk) 14:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Comments from zmbro
 * Table needs scope rows and cols per MOS:ACCESS
 * I think that I fixed this for all rows. Is this how it should be?   18:58, 21 December 2019 (UTC)    20:27, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Images seem a little big. Also, why is the lead image smaller than the rest?
 * I added upright in the pipe, so all portraits are similar.  Does this work?   18:58, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All notes should have references
 * All notes now have references   20:27, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Most refs should be archived
 * I am not quite sure how to do this.  18:58, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There you go. Under "view history", there's a link that says "fix dead links" which will take you to the IABot which tags and fixes dead links. There's also an optional button that says "add archives to all non-dead references" which you click. It makes it much easier to do it manually. HTH :-) – zmbro (talk) 15:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * All images need alt text
 * Done.  19:19, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Many urls have connections issues (seen here)
 * I think this is fixed   05:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In background, you say "thirty-five" then "37" three sentences later. One or the other
 * There were 35 counties and two counties had two regiments as explain in the text.  Will try to make this clearer in the text.    19:16, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry what I meant by that was you spell out "thirty-five" but then use numbers for "37" a few sentences later. I just meant either spell it out or use numbers for both. My bad.

What I've found so far. Lots of problems but seems do-able. – zmbro (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a template box that can be added?
 * The template is at the bottom of the page    Militias were at the state level and I don't think there is a template for all Militia units in the United States during the revolution.    18:58, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * "Rumple, Jethro Rev (1881). A History of Rowan County." This is a book and will need much more than author year & title
 * Added pages  05:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * "Connor, Robert D.W. (1916). Revolutionary Leaders of North Carolina (PDF). Greensboro: North Carolina State Normal & Industrial College." This is in both "references" and "bibliography"
 * Left as just Reference  05:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure if "carolana.com" is an RS (same with "beaufortartist.blogspot.com" on ref 67 since it's a blog)
 * See note above.  The carolana.com website is a database based on the books that J.D. Lewis wrote on the North Carolina militia.  He lists the sources used in the database, also.  It is considered by the researchers of the North and South Carolina Revolutionary War history a Reputable Source.  Carteret County during the American Revolution 1765-1785,
 * I am still trying to find a more direct link to the book, Carteret County during the American Revolution 1765-1785, by Jean Bruyere Kell

This has been quite the learning experience. I will take a look at it again tomorrow and see if everything is fixed. Thanks everyone for your help and kind advice. 05:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Took a final look at everything this morning and added: a few links, description of places were the units fought with existing ref; image of MG Smallwood (2nd NC Militia commander, sorry no images of John Ashe, Sr. the 1st cc, he died in 1781); summary of table.  Can't think of anything more to add or fix.     16:03, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

If there are no more unresolved issues, what is the process for making this a Featured List? 03:51, 27 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't all of the books in the Bibliography have a publisher? Besides that, everything looks good -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 16:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I added publishers for all the Bibliographi references and inline citations that were books.  19:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support from Chidgk1

A few minor things:


 * An article description could perhaps be added. Done.   23:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Consider linking to Major general.
 * Done.    22:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I am not familiar with US history: " .... the head of the Council of Safety which oversaw resistance to British rule." implies there was more than one Council of Safety or should there be a comma after Council of Safety?
 * There was a Council/Committee of Safety at the Provincial level.  and each county in North Carolina had a Committees of Safety.  See Committees of safety (American Revolution) and Rowan County Committee of Safety


 * "....arranging representation in the executive body." so by "the executive body" you mean the council? If so maybe change to "... in the council".
 * Done.  22:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't understand "organised" in "The North Carolina Provincial Congress authorized 35 existing county militias to be organized on September 9, 1775.". Perhaps "called-up"?
 * The wording comes from the Provincial Congress minutes. The militia were only county entities until the Congress acted to organize them in the interim government.   Again, I think this is what is stated in the minutes of the Congress.    22:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I did not recognise the meaning of "subordination" but figured it out from the context - I cannot think of the proper word though.
 * Subordination is a common term used in the military to show the hierarchy of units.    23:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I suppose LTC means Lieutenant colonel - maybe I missed the link.
 * It is a common abbreviation for a US Army Lieutenant Colonel.  I linked Lieutenant Colonel, the first time it occurred and added the abbreviation in parenthesis.     22:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

If you have time could you point out my mistakes in Featured list candidates/List of active coal fired power stations in Turkey/archive1 Chidgk1 (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at it. Going through a Featured List review is one of the most instructive things that I have done in Wikipedia.     23:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 21:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.