Wikipedia:Peer review/Horatio Bottomley/archive1

Horatio Bottomley
This peer review discussion has been closed. If you think most politicians are crooks...well, you may be right in many cases, but today's bunch pale into insignificance compared with Bottomley, one-time Liberal MP, founder of John Bull magazine (20th century version) and also, surprisingly, of The Financial Times. One thing that distinguishes Bottomley from his present-day counterparts, and makes him almost likeable, is that he was completely blatant in his activities – an out-and-out swindler blessed with a charm and plausibility that persuaded thousands – millions, perhaps – to part with their money, over and over again. A brilliant orator, he was one of the principal voices of the people during the First World War, and would probably have been in the Cabinet but for being temporarily disqualified from parliament as an undischarged bankrupt. He overreached himself in the end, went to prison and died broke, but what a story to tell. All comments, as usual, greatly appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 18:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt
Interesting indeed. I confess to never having heard of the individual. My comments:
 * Lede.
 * I would add "at age 14" after "errand boy"
 * Life
 * "Horatio received a useful basic education there" I would strike "there"
 * "mainly based on the marked facial resemblance between Bradlaugh and Bottomley noted by biographers" presumably more than biographers, as Bottomley encouraged it. Full stop needed.
 * "with his sister from who he had been separated" from whom, I would think.
 * "London's first financial daily paper" perhaps, to avoid the repetition of "financial", "London's first business daily"
 * "developed it into large country mansion" a missing a
 * " he had the constituency in his pocket." A pocket borough? (no action, unless you want to avoid the joke)
 * "and drained Bottomley's rapidly depleting resources" perhaps "and rapidly depleted Bottomley's resources"
 * I think the last paragraph in the "Parliament ..." subsection could be profitably split at "His parliamentary ambitions". You might want to make it clearer that a bankrupt could not remain in the Commons (assuming that was so then). I know you say "forced to" but that still can be misinterpreted.
 * "the winner of the sweepstake". Is it sweepstake or sweepstakes?
 * This refers to the single sweepstake on the 1914 Derby. Brianboulton (talk) 09:52, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "complete coincidence". Is "complete" really needed?
 * Somewhere, a link to "First World War" might be appropriate. I don't see that you do it.
 * (putting oar in): I respectfully disagree with Wehwalt. Linking WWI or WW2 seems to me to be WP:OVERLINK. I can't imagine any circs in which a reader might want to click on it from here. Just my two bobsworth.  Tim riley  talk    21:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "Macdonald's birth certificate which indicated" perhaps "showed" for "indicated"?
 * "with a distinctive policy stance" not distinct?
 * "by by-election victories" if possible, you may wish to avoid the by-by
 * "upon which he severed all connections with the paper." While this is understandable as a whole, who "he" is a bit muddy. I imagine Bottomley.  I guess it's confusion as to whether Odhams is severing the Bottomley-paper relationship or Bottomley doing it.
 * Appraisal
 * "notes his ability to charm the publicpec"
 * I am somewhat minded of your own comments regarding Mr. Franklin Peale, more or less that you were uncertain whether he was a good man who did wrong, or a bad'un with good points. Much the same for Mr Bottomley, though perhaps both his good and his bad points were on a grander scale.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review, all attended to except the WW1 link, where I am inclined to the Riley point of view. HB, I believe, definitely falls in the category of a bad lad with a few redeeming features. He certainly "got away with it" for long enough. Brianboulton (talk) 09:52, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Interruption by Bencherlite
Work is terribly hectic for the next week or so, so I may have no time to help out here, but a scan of some reflections by Travers Humphreys is on its way to you. Now he's an interesting fellow as well... BencherliteTalk 08:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per your talk, some of these reflections have been incorporated into the article. Mant thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 09:56, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

 * Family background and childhood
 * "the comfortable London district of Marylebone" – comfortable in patches. See Octavia Hill: much, perhaps most, of Marylebone was desperately poor in the mid-19th C. Furthermore, from Crown Estate files once under my care: 15 October 1894—from the Vestry clerk of St Pancras about houses in Albany Street – "The complainants who are ratepayers and residents in the locality say that women are seen at the windows in a state of nudity, and beckon men passing, and that other acts of indecency have been observed at the houses." And even as late as 1912 Eliza in Pygmalion says that Lisson Grove "wasn't fit for a pig to live in".
 * I've deleted "comfortable". Brianboulton (talk) 12:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * First steps
 * "a City firm" – probably as well to blue-link "City".
 * Hansard Publishing Union
 * "He benefitted further" – you can, if you look under every stone, find a dictionary that approves of a double t in "benefited", but you will search for it in vain in the OED, and Chambers mentions it only to dismiss it as an Americanism. Collins, it is true, admits it without rude remark, but says that it is "especially US". "Benefited" is one of those odd English spellings I have a mild thing about, along with "focused" and "biased".
 * The Oxford Dictionary of English allows "benefitted" without comment – but it's an ugly verb, and I've rephrased. Brianboulton (talk) 12:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Company promoter, newspaper proprietor, would-be politician
 * "as Hyman observes…" – first we've heard of Hyman. A word or so of introduction would be good.
 * Parliament, John Bull, bankruptcy
 * "before s court of aldermen" – before a court, I imagine, but I didn't quite like to assume.
 * Appraisal
 * "The possibility that Noël Coward…" – this, in my opinion, is pure banana oil. No work about Coward published since this alleged 1981 find has mentioned it, and all works about Coward, whenever published, indicate that he was bleakly uninterested in politics and its practitioners. In 1994 the author of one of the most thorough books on Coward, Philip Hoare, wrote an article in the Indy about WWI and its aftermath in which he mentions both Coward and Bottomley, without any reference to this supposed link. I think I am right in saying that no real person alive or dead is portrayed in any of Coward's plays, and the idea that he would have contemplated a play about a forgotten swindler of yesteryear defies belief.
 * My first thought was to follow your suggestion on my talkpage that, if this snippet was retained it, should be in the form of a brief footnote. I tried that, but it left the Timothy West information as a short single-sentence paragraph – the same problem arises if I delete it. Another issue might be that someone will accuse me of deleting properly sourced information on the grounds that I think it implausible (I've had these arguments before). I'll ponder, see what I can do. Brianboulton (talk) 12:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I knew there was something fishy about this. While at the Br Library today I sent for the book that purportedly mentions this alleged incident. There is not a word about Bottomley, wallets, Texan Whorehouses, tubas or Henderson Forsythe on p. 193 or anywhere else. The editor who added it has made no other edits on Wikipedia (not under that user name, at any rate, but I suspect we have an outbreak of hosiery here). It was reverted by an experienced editor at the time, who correctly challenged the claimed reference, but the adder persisted and got away with it. Time this hoax was blitzed once and for all. –   Tim riley  talk    17:09, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying this, Tim. I had previously removed this information from the text and relegated it to a footnote. That, too, has now been removed. It might be a good idea if your note was pasted into the  Bottomley article talkpage, where an insistence that the story is true soils the page and might mislead unwary readers. Brianboulton (talk) 23:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * PS - I've added the appropriate note to the talkpage myself. Brianboulton (talk) 08:56, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

That's all from me. I have been following the progress of this article since you took it in hand, and have enjoyed watching its development to its present highly readable and entertaining state. Another feather in the Boulton cap! –  Tim riley  talk    21:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review & comments, all fixed except as noted. Brianboulton (talk) 12:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat
Hugely entertaining piece, and as well constructed, crafted and referenced as always.

I made a few minor copy edits a few days ago – feel free to delete or tweak as appropriate. A few more minor points for consideration:

Parliament, etc
 * "steel-capped boots"? I'm not sure the steel toecap would make any noise; he old hob-nail boots would, and army ammunition boots, and I wonder if there are other sources that can clarify? (Further thought: steel-tipped boots - wearing Blakeys, or similar - would also work).
 * One source says "steel-capped", two others say "boots fitted with iron tips and heels". Latter does indeed make more sense - I'll adjust accordingly. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * "F.E. Smith": having the F.E. unspaced will get some very hot under the collar, as I've found out previously!
 * Well, if they do I will follow your example of quiet, understated resolve. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Parliament 2
 * Is "Independent MP" worthy of a capital?
 * I'd say yes, when it's a formal label, rather than a description of the member's political stance. Lots of MPs with party labels are "independent-minded", but they aren't Independents. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A veritable roller-coster of a story that I'm chuckling my way through. More to follow soonest. - SchroCat (talk) 16:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments thus far, and I look forward to more, when you are able. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Only one final point from me: should the DNB (in Apprasisal) be in italics, as it's originally a print medium?
 * The complicating factor is that the ODNB entry I've used as a source is from the online version, which isn't the same as the print version. But as this link is to the print version, it's probably safer to italicise, which I've done. Brianboulton (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

That's all from me in this very enjoyable piece; please drop me a note when you go to FAC. - SchroCat (talk) 22:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Cassianto
This is a fleeting visit owing to strict time limitations in real life, but wanted to be part of it nonetheless.
 * "He found a home with his aunt Caroline Praill..." -- did he alone find a home (staying with) his aunt Caroline Praill, or did he and his aunt find a home together?
 * Adjusted: "His aunt Caroline Praill gave him a home" Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Parliament, John Bull, bankruptcy
 * "This journal recorded the proceedings of Hackney's local "parliament"—essentially a debating society that mirrored the proceedings at Westminster." -- Slight repetition of "proceedings".
 * "Among its regular features, Bottomley revived his "The World, the Flesh and the Devil" column from The Sun, and also adapted that paper's slogan: "If you read it in John Bull, it is so" Bottomley persuaded Julius Elias, managing director of Odhams Limited, to handle the printing, but chaotic financial management meant that Odhams were rarely paid." -- are we missing a full stop after the slogan and before the second Bottomley?
 * F.E. Smith → F. E. Smith?
 * See above (i.e. let's see what happens) Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * D.H. Lawrence →D. H. Lawrence?
 * Ditto

Notes That's me done, a fine article. I fixed three minor formatting mistakes within the citations. Let me know when you go to FAC. Cassianto talk 20:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No. 7 finishes with a comma.


 * Thank you for finding the time for these helpful comments, all addressed (except the spaces stuff). Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)