Wikipedia:Peer review/William McKinley/archive1

William McKinley
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… on behalf of Coemgenus and myself, because we plan to bring this to FAC soon and would be grateful for feedback

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Eisfbnore comments


 * "He defeated his Democratic-Populist rival, William Jennings Bryan, running a front porch campaign in which he demanded "sound money" (the gold standard unless altered by international agreement) and promised that high tariffs would restore prosperity." – you may call me unkind, but I could possibly argue that the sentence could imply that Bryan ran the campaign. I'd swap "running" for "on" or "in".
 * "Religiously, the family was staunchly Methodist and young William followed in that tradition, becoming active in the local Methodist church at the age of sixteen." – def article before "young William", ne?
 * I think that's OK. I've used similar constructions.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Hanna had come to admire McKinley, and in the years that followed, became a close adviser to him." – move the comma from after "McKinley" to after "and", as the parenthetical phrase is "in the years that followed".
 * "Instead, McKinley's wealthy supporters, including Hanna and Chicago publisher H. H. Kohlsaat became trustees of a fund from which the notes would be paid." – comma after "Kohlsaat".
 * "Morgan expects the debate over McKinley's actions to continue indefinitely without resolution, and notes that whatever however one judges McKinley's actions in American expansion, one of his motivations was to change the lives of Filipinos and Cubans for the better." – "whatever however"?
 * "Czolgosz was put on trial for murder nine days after McKinley's death, was found guilty, was sentenced to death on September 26, and was executed by electric chair on October 29, 1901." – I appreciate the grammatical parallelisms in the sentence, but I fear that there are a few too many 'was'es. Eisfbnore  talk 13:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All valid points which I will deal with later in the day. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Except as noted, those things are done.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: My review will be somewhat fragmented due to time constraints, but I'll get through as much as I can before you feel you have to move forward:-


 * Image issue?
 * According to WP:PD: "The United States Copyright Office, in section 206.02(b), 206.02(c), and 206.02(d) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, has stated its position that works of the U.S. Postal Service, of the government of the District of Columbia, and of the government of Puerto Rico are not "works of the U.S. government" and thus are subject to copyright." How does this square with the licensing of the stamp image?
 * Because the USPS, a government owned corporation did not come into existence until 1971. Prior to that, the United States Post Office Department issued stamps, and their works are government works.  Note that pre-1978 USPS issues are also PD as they did not put copyright notices on until then.  USPOD stamps, of which this is one, are in the public domain.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * "In 1876, he was elected to Congress, where he became the party's leading expert on the protective tariff" Up to now you have only indirectly identified McKinley with the Republican Party, so "the party" should be clarified.
 * "He was elected Ohio's governor in 1891 and 1893, steering a moderate course between capital and labor interests." I think "steering a moderate course" is what he did in office, not what he did while being elected - or am I misunderstanding?
 * "...some historians argue he should be more highly regarded." I'm not sure that this is established in the text. One historian offers an explanation for McKinley's modest ranking, but that is about all.
 * I fixed the first two -- will consult with co-author about the third. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Early life and family
 * "He met Nancy Allison there in 1829, and married her there the same year." The repetition of "there" is a bit clunky
 * Fixed. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Civil War
 * Over-use of "soon" in opening paragraph ("The men soon left...", "the men soon began training", "Delays in issuance of uniforms and weapons soon brought the men...") I also think the same word reappears rather too frequently in the subsequent text
 * Bearing in mind the overall length of the article, this section is one which I believe could be advantageously pruned without loss of significant information. To give just one example of sentences that could be substantially shortened:
 * Except for encounters with bushwhackers, they passed the next few months out of contact with the enemy until September, when the regiment encountered Confederates at Carnifex Ferry in present-day West Virginia and drove them back.

could become:-


 * Their first contact with the enemy came in September when they drove back Confederate troops at Carnifex Ferry in present-day West Virginia.


 * There are other examples where unnecessary details could be pared. I am unsure, as a general reader, of the extent to which McKinley's presidency, or indeed his political career, was particularly influenced by his Civil War experiences, and so wonder if the 1250 words devoted to this section are, as they say, "value for money".


 * I've trimmed this and some other parts. It's not the most important section as national events go, but those years were quite formative to McKinley and very relevant to his future political career.  But, yes, it should be concise.  --Coemgenus (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

To be continued Brianboulton (talk) 00:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

A bit more
 * Legal career and marriage
 * "He soon formed a partnership..." - that word again
 * When Hayes was nominated for governor in 1867, McKinley made speeches on his behalf in Stark County, McKinley's first foray into politics." Rather clumsy close repetition of the name (which is mentioned eight times in this paragaph)
 * "As McKinley's professional career progressed, so too did his social life blossom, wooing Ida Saxton, the daughter of a prominent Canton family". It was him, not his social life, thay wooed Ida
 * These are fixed. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Congressional career
 * Readers like me, unfamiliar with the workings of Congress, may wonder that McKinley, nominated for the House of Representatives in August 1876 and presumably elected that autumn, first took his seat eleven months later. Why the delay?
 * "Canton had become prosperous as a center for the manufacture of farm equipment because of protection." Surely not just Canton?
 * Leech is talking about what may have informed McKinley's views on the tariff; I've tied it to him a bit mroe closely.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The information dealing with McKinley's bid to become Speaker looks chronologically misplaced. We jump suddenly from 1880 to 1889, but the subsequent paragraph deals with events of the 1880s. Those events, however, seem to have little to do with McKinley's congressional career; hsould this be a separate subsection?ǏǏ
 * Gerrymandering
 * "The national party sent its legions to Canton..." Clarify that you mean the Republican party. Perhaps rather than the figurative "legions" you should more realistically say "leading figures"

Brianboulton (talk) 00:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've done the ones in the (now renamed and reorganized) Congressional career/gerrymander material.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

A further instalment (to end of election campaign)
 * Governor of Ohio
 * Image caption: rather long, especially as the main subject is Blaine rather than McKinley; See MOS:CAPTION - "Captions should be succinct..." etc
 * Please clarify: "Sherman, with considerable assistance from Hanna, turned back a challenge by Foraker to win another term in the Senate". But weren't Sherman and Foraker members of the same party? Was Foraker's challenge merely for the nomination, and someone else was beaten in the general election?
 * It was a legislative election. The minority Democrats weren't going to get their guy elected, so they'd do a deal.  And some of the Republicans were allied with Foraker ... he fell a few votes short.  This sort of thing led to direct election of senators.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "...the aging Blaine, Reed, and McKinley". Does the adjective apply just to Blaine, or to all three?
 * "Hanna established an unofficial McKinley headquarters..." At what specific point did Hanna align himself specifically to McKinley? The last we heard of him, he was assisting other candidates.
 * Slightly more detail required for what you mean by "business notes"
 * The McKinleys placed their property in the hands of trustees; a couple of senetences later we read: "All of the couple's property was returned to them". What is the timescale here? Was the property returned quickly, or years later?
 * Regrettably, here in the UK we don't know what a "railroad trestle" is. Some kind of metal girder bridge, perhaps?
 * This reads as clumsy: "The local sheriff wired McKinley using alarming terms, and the governor responded by sending a large force of militia, correctly assuming, based on his Civil War experience, that an overwhelming force would make violence unlikely." I would split this thus: "The local sheriff wired McKinley using alarming terms, and the governor responded by sending a large force of militia. Based on his Civil War experience he correctly assumed that an overwhelming show of force would make violence unlikely."
 * In the last sentence of this paragraph the word "However..." is not required
 * "His political efforts in Ohio were rewarded by the election of a Republican successor..." Successor as governor, presumably?
 * Obtaining the nomination
 * "Sherman did not run again after 1888": suggest "Sherman did not seek elective office after 1888"
 * He did, of course, for Senate (1892). I will clarify.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Lamented Platt in his memoirs..." Quirky; I would invert the first two words
 * "Ohio's vote gave McKinley the nomination": this could easily be misunderstood. I know you mean that in the alphabetic roll call of states, Ohio's delegates provided the necessary majority, but non-American readers may imagine that Ohio's delegates alone had the power to determine the nomination.
 * General election campaign
 * In the sentence beginning "Once Bryan's plans became clear" the second comma should be a semicolon and the third comma should be a colon
 * Examples of possible overdetailing (bearing in mind there is a linked article:-
 * "excepting three days in July when he fulfilled nonpolitical speaking engagements elsewhere in Ohio, and a weekend of rest in late August."
 * "If McKinley was still dealing with the previous delegation, they were halted on the far side of the arch from McKinley's home, and were offered their choice of beer or lemonade to refresh them as they waited."
 * Yeah, the section needs a little clipping. I'll cut it back.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The recording is brilliant!
 * I'll say. I'm not sure McKinley's style of speaking would go over well today, but he certainly had a way of speaking.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll be back with more. Brianboulton (talk) 00:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your valiant efforts. Those are all done.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

More: - (almost done)
 * Inauguration and appointments
 * I am not yet an images expert, but I am learning...I have a slight worry over File:McKinley sworn in.jpeg. I am fairly certain that colour photography didn't exist in 1901, the stated publication date. Thus the coloured version may not have been published until much later, and may thus still be under copyright. This is the kind of issue I always looked to Jappalang to pronounce on, but alas he is long gone.
 * Fear not, in this case the colorized versions are in the 1901 original book. There were a large number of bios written and sold, the attraction of Davis's book is the great images, including this colorized shot.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The sentence "Sherman was not, however, McKinley's first choice for the position; he initially offered it to Senator Allison" should be the second sentence in this paragraph. Coming after the long account of Sherman's appointment, it has no impact.
 * This sentence definitely needs some attention: "Once in Cabinet office, Sherman's mental incapacity became increasingly apparent, and he was often bypassed by his first assistant, McKinley's Canton crony, Judge William Day, and by the somewhat-deaf second secretary, Alvey A. Adee, prior to Sherman's departure from office on the eve of war in 1898." Suggestion: "Once in Cabinet office, Sherman's mental incapacity became increasingly apparent. He was often bypassed by his first assistant, McKinley's Canton crony Judge William Day, and by the somewhat-deaf second secretary, Alvey A. Adee. Sherman eventually departed from office on the eve of war, in 1898." - though from a chronological viewpoint it might be better to defer the last part.
 * You mention there was speculation that McKinley might appoint a Gold Democrat as Secretary of the Treasury, but the only candidates mentioned in connection with the post seem to be Republicans.
 * Could some of the details of the machinations surrounding minor appointments be trimmed? Otherwise one tends to lose the more important threads, e.g. concerning Alger at the War Department.
 * War with Spain
 * Why no link to main article: Spanish–American War?
 * "an" war for Cuban independence?
 * The Maine "exploded and sank", not "exploded and sunk"
 * "the court ruled that the Maine was blown up by an underwater mine" → "...the Maine had been blown up by an underwater mine"
 * No mention of the Rough Riders (about all I can remember about the Spanish-American War]]?
 * Peace and territorial gain
 * Clarify from which royal government the Republic of Hawaii had broken away.
 * Expanding influence overseas
 * No particular points here.
 * Tariffs and bimetallism
 * "American negotiators soon concluded..." Why not provide a date?
 * "The Prime Minister, Lord Salisbury, and his government showed some interest..." Technically there should be a comma after "government", but that would look very ugly. Why not shorten to: "The British government showed some interest..."? (and alter "he" to "they" later on)

One more heave and we're done. Brianboulton (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

...and here it is:-
 * Civil rights
 * My problem with this section is the persistent use of "black" as a noun to describe Afro-Americans, and also the description "Negro leaders". Neither of these terms would be used in this fashion by any mainstream publications in the UK, and the majority of readers here will find such usage offensive. I am kind of surprised to find the terms used so freely, and can only assume that what causes offense here is largely acceptable elsewhere. Bearing in mind that the English Wikipedia is read widely outside America, I strongly advise use of alternative language. For what it's worth, I think that "black" as an adjective, e.g. in "black leaders" is generally accepted; the noun form is uncomfortably reminiscent of an earlier age. I also think that "Jim Crow laws" should be rendered within quotes.
 * Very well, I've changed those to "African American", I do not think Afro-American is that commonly used in the States. I would never use the word "Negro" in my own voice, the usages are in quotations, and I would hope people can understand that terminology in this area seems to evolve.  However, I will look at them again.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


 * 1900 election
 * No particular comment; admirably concise
 * Second term and assassination
 * I'm not sure that I can say the same about this section. Although it makes good reading, the existence of a main article provides the opportunity to be rather more concise. Here are examples of areas where I think trimming would be beneficial:-
 * "One man in the crowd, anarchist Leon Czolgosz, was not there to hear McKinley, but to kill him" A little dramatic or journalistic?
 * "He had initially decided to get near McKinley, on September 4, he decided to assassinate him." Well, why otherwise would he want to get near him? Czolgosz's further movements in this paargraph could easily be abbreviated.
 * I would also seek to summarise the next paragraph. Suggested:-
 * McKinley's concerns, after unsuccessfully trying to convince Cortelyou that he was not seriously wounded, were to urge his aides to break the news gently to Ida, and to ask that Czolgosz not be further assaulted by the mob—a request that may have saved his assassin's life.[224] McKinley was taken to the Exposition hospital, which had been set up to deal with the minor medical issues of fairgoers but was not equipped for major surgery and lacked experienced medical staff.  Dr. Matthew D. Mann, who with other doctors had hastened to the scene, attempted to remove the bullet, but Mann had little experience in abdominal surgery or in dealing with gunshot wounds, and was unable to locate the bullet. Although a primitive X-ray machine was being exhibited on the Exposition grounds, it was not used.  Mann carefully cleaned and closed the wound, after which McKinley was taken to the Milburn House, where the First Lady had taken the news calmly.[225]


 * A couple of minor niggles:-
 * "were to almost circle the nation..." Very awkward phrasing - a case here for not splitting the infinitive.
 * "Czolgosz lined up at the Temple of Music..." Is it possible for one man to "line up"?


 * Funeral, memorials, and legacy
 * I think the insertion of the word "alive" (2nd sentence, 2nd para) is inappropriate). You have made it clear that she did not die
 * Legacy and historical image
 * "pursuing the trusts" may be a little cryptic for most readers
 * As Phillips is a contemporary writer it would be more conventional to say "Phillipos writes..." and to adjust later tenses accordingly. The same applies to H. Wayne Morgan, who incidentally has not been properly introduced in the text; he is initially mentioned in the "Peace and territorial gain" section. In fact, at the end of the article you have "Morgan alludes..."

That concludes my review. To summarise, I would almost give the article its bronze star on the basis of that recording of McKinley speaking; a wonderful feature. I was also highly amused that a Supreme Court appointee had to go back to college to learn some law. Most of the points raised in the review are relatively minor; I will reiterate my two main concerns:-
 * I think there are opportunities for trimming the text, over and above the specific instances that I have mentioned. I acknowledge that the article has lost nearly 1000 words since I began reviewing, which is fine, but I think a reasonable target would be a max of 12000, which would align better with the existing president FAs.
 * As detailed above I do have a serious concern in the Civil rights section.

Brianboulton (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I think I've addressed those concerns, perhaps the give and take of FAC will smooth out any further difficulties with terminology. Thank you for your clueful review. I think I have caught everything, and I've slimmed it down to 11,959. I will look for opportunities to bring it down a bit further as I'm sure Coemgenus will as well.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:53, 14 March 2012 (UTC)