Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/John Bullock Clark

Article promoted by Donner60 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

John Bullock Clark
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

This was previously nominated back in August but was withdrawn without commentary after I got really busy off-wiki. A politician, lawyer, and militia officer, Clark saw combat experience in the American Civil War that included leading a militia unit into battle against the United States Army while still a sitting member of the United States House of Representatives. Hog Farm Talk 16:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Harrias
Not much wrong with this. Generally, I wonder if so much detail is necessary on the general Civil War manoeuvres and stuff, but I'm broadly content that is provides useful context. Harrias (he/him) • talk 12:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "Conard, Howard L., ed. (1901)" could do with an OCLC identifier if there is one.
 * added
 * "Vandiver, W. D. (1926)" is out of order in the References, and should drop below the two Sheridan sources.
 * Fixed
 * "Vandiver, W. D. (1926)" could also do with an ISSN (0026-6582, I think).
 * added
 * Consider archiving online sources.
 * done
 * "The child of Bennett and Martha Clark, John Bullock Clark Sr. was born in.." It might just be me, but I find it odd to include "Sr." when talking about him being born, as he presumably didn't come to be known as this until much later.
 * changed
 * "Allardice refers to him.." Who is Allardice?
 * Glossed
 * "..of the state by the early 1839." Not sure if it an ENGVAR thing, but "by the early 1839" doesn't sound right to me; I'd get rid of that "the".
 * "the" removed
 * "During the election, Democratic newspapers spread claims that the Whigs had spread false party ballots in parts of the state that listed the corrected Democrat candidates except substituting Clark for Reynolds." I had to read this a couple of times, because I initially thought it was using "that listed the corrected Democrat candidates" to show which parts of the state they were spread in. Try rephrasing it.
 * "corrected" was a typo for "correct" - is this clearer with the error corrected?
 * Honestly, I've now read it so many times that I can't tell anymore, so we'll call it fine for the time being at least! Harrias  (he/him) • talk 20:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Be consistent whether you use "pro-slavery" or "proslavery".
 * Have standardized to pro-slavery
 * - Thanks for the review! Replies are above; everything should be fixed now. Hog Farm Talk 02:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Support nice work. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 20:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

PM
Will take a crack at this shortly. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Body
 * "Historian" isn't a formal rank or position, and AFAIK should be preceded by the definite article. ie "The historian Kenneth..." same later with McCandless, and in a general sense starting sentences with a role rather than the definite article, eg "Democratic politician..."
 * I think I've caught all of these
 * "entered the bar" is rather odd wording. Our article says "admitted to the bar" is used in the US per Call to the bar.
 * Rephrased
 * "except substituting Clark for Reynolds" who is Reynolds? He has not been introduced prior to this point. Also the man at the later link for Reynolds died in 1844?
 * I've moved the link/gloss for this Reynolds up. This is describing an election in 1840, when Reynolds was still alive. I think the fact that a 1848 militia promotion is tacked on to the end of the prior section is causing the time confusion, so I've moved that sentence to its proper chronological location
 * "and he stood as a candidate again in 1852" unsuccessfully?
 * I have to assume so, but the sources don't deal with this clearly. Warner & Yeans only says that he was a state rep without giving the years, Allardice and the Congressional biography only give the years. The only reference I have been able to turn up to this re-election campaign is while as late as 1852, the editor of the Glasgow Times offered a sarcastic reminder to his Boon's Lick readership and to Clark, then a candidate for Congress ...
 * After further research, I think Phillips is in error, so I've removed this. I found several news stories in 1852 asking for him to run, the article in the Glasgow Times that Phillips is citing was written after the election and doesn't claim Clark was a candidates, and I turned up the election returns from 1852 on newspapers.com. The MO House seat in Howard County was won by C. F. Jackson and N. G. Elliott over two candidates named Payne and Patterson, and the US House election was John Gaines Miller vs. James S. Green. Hog Farm Talk 15:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * what rank was Franz Sigel?
 * Added
 * comma after "Battle of Carthage, Missouri"
 * Done
 * there is a link to Thomas Caute Reynolds, is this the same Thomas Reynolds as earlier? If so, link him earlier and delink this example. If not, perhaps differentiate the two?
 * I've distinguished the two in a footnote
 * so he was wanted by the authorities, and what he heard while still in Mexico was wrong? Otherwise why was he arrested and detained when he returned?
 * Allardice isn't clear on this. The only other source I've been able to find that deals with this is Vandiver, and I don't think this is within the small sphere of things Vandiver is usable for. (Among other things, this section of Vandiver praises John Newman Edwards and retells a dubious story about how "Tip", alledgely one of Clark's former slaves, helped get him free from Fort Jackson due to personal affection for Clark) Hog Farm Talk 05:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I fixed a couple of ndashes
 * Thank you! Hog Farm Talk 23:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * I think his military rank makes him notable for that as well, and should be in the first sentence, ie "was a brigadier general in the Missouri State Guard on the Confederate side during the American Civil War and a politician who..." or switch the two roles and mention politician first then soldier
 * I've gone with "was a militia officer and politician who served as a member ...". It seems odd to me to stress only his brief CSA service when his role in the Missouri Mormon War attracts as much attention due to his being the recipient of the Extermination Order. Hog Farm Talk 23:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "ersatz" means replacement or substitute. Not sure it is the right word here.
 * Removed word Hog Farm Talk 23:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "The Confederate Governor of Missouri..." as above
 * But isn't "Confederate Governor of Missouri" a formal title?
 * "was also a general in the" but Clark wasn't in the CSA, he was in the MSG (I'd drop "also")
 * Done here and in the article body as well. Hog Farm Talk 23:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * in general, replace Federal with Union, per other discussions on this matter


 * I was not involved in this discussion, but would press for the reverse. Confederate Lost cause terminology is inappropriate and rejected by current scholarship. See Publisher's Note on the use of Civil War Terms for the US Army's official position on the matter. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * G'day . I understand that rationale and it makes more sense, but if we adopt that approach for the Federal or United States side we should also adopt its approach to the Confederates, ie do not use legitimising terms. Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:NPOV: "Prefer nonjudgmental language". The US Army advises: "describe the political and social situation of the Civil War in a neutral manner." Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

That's it. Consider this a content and image review. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * IB
 * I would consider adding a military person module to the infobox with his rank, wars served in etc
 * - this is done in a draft form right now but it's a bit clunky. I'm trying to distinguish between his purely state service before the Civil War and his MSG service. Clark was never part of the formal US or CS armed forces. Hog Farm Talk 15:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Images
 * the IB image is PD and properly licensed
 * File:Missouri State Guard divisions map (cropped).svg needs information on the source used to draw the map. I think that info is on the original file page, just copy it across.
 * Should be addressed now. Hog Farm Talk 23:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

PM67 - just wanted to let you know this is still on my radar ... still trying to get consistent internet access after moving; hopefully should be resolved later this week. Hog Farm Talk 02:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * - sorry for the delay here. I think everything should be taken care of. Hog Farm Talk 23:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Source review - pass
Hawkeye7  (discuss)  00:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * References are nicely and consistently formatted, and are in alphabetical order (which seems strangely difficult for people lately)
 * Reputable sources are used that accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge
 * Spot checks:
 * fn 7a, 8, 14, 55 - okay

Hawkeye7
Looks good. Some comments: Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Should his notable relatives be noted in the Infobox?
 * This is done
 * "He entered the bar in 1824" In Australia we would say "was admitted to the bar"; "entered" in this context sounds like he went drinking
 * Rephrased; I'm going to claim WP:LIMITED for this phrasing be too close now to what Warner & Yearns have as I don't think it's avoidable without being stilted
 * Should Militia be linked to Militia (United States)?
 * Linked in the lead; it's already linked in the body
 * Lead: "With the outbreak of the American Civil War in 1861, Clark, who was wealthy and owned 160 slaves, became a leading secessionist in Missouri." Body: " By 1861, Clark was wealthy and owned 160 slaves... Clark was a leading Missouri secessionist." Source: "Clark was a strong secessionist and a leader in the state's secession movement. Clark's own comments deserve quoting at length: 'While insisting that the best course was to stand by the union, I had, nevertheless, always said that when war did come I would go with the South... That Spring [of 1861] ... I was worth a million [dollars]. On my place there were 160 slaves, seventy of them men.'" The question is whether he became a secessionist only after the war began, as the lead claims, or before, as is implied by the body. It's hard to imagine him being a leader if he only became a secessionist after the war began. The source is poorly written. (His support of succession doesn't sound "strong" in the source, although after the war many people may have back-pedalled on their support.)
 * I've adjusted the lead version. Warner & Yearns is silent on this matter. Piston & Hatcher calls his "one of the state's leading Secessionists". Vandiver claims that Clark became a secessionist after the Camp Jackson affair and ensuing riot but I don't think Vandiver is a suitable source for such matters. As to "It's hard to imagine him being a leader if he only became a secessionist after the war began", Sterling Price who commanded the entire State Guard, had originally opposed secession. Essentially Nathaniel Lyon managed to piss a bunch of people off between the Camp Jackson affair and stating the he was okay with seeing "every man, woman, and child in the State dead and buried" at the meeting that ended the Price-Harney Truce, so a number of people who were on the fence moved over to secessionism at that time.
 * "In October, Jackson and the deposed Confederate government of Missouri voted to secede and join the Confederacy" How can it be the Confederate government of Missouri before it voted to secede and join the Confederacy?
 * Rephrased
 * Consider putting his postbellum career into a separate section
 * I'm not convinced that there's enough material there to make it worthwhile to do so
 * "After the Confederate defeat in 1865, a reward was issued for Clark's arrest" You could mention that it was $10,000. Alas, the source does not tell us why they wanted him arrested.
 * Added the dollar amount; I'm not finding anywhere why they wanted to arrest him
 * - replies are above. I don't have a good answer for as to when he became a secessionist, although the 1850 election comment from McCandless about "most likely to disrupt the party and the Union" seems relevant as well. Hog Farm Talk 03:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks fine to me. I don't usually deal with articles about the 19th century because it is outside my area of expertise; US politics is highly controversial and subject to ArbCom sanctions; and historians of the period are apt to look at me with disdain and say things like "I'll bet your primary sources are typed." Hawkeye7   (discuss)  05:40, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Support by Donner60

 * Comment: I noted above two changes that you made in response to Peacemaker comments that were not previously noted. I think that now shows all comments
 * Comment: I assume "grade" v. "rank" is of no relevance to an appointment as a state militia general; the Eichers are sticklers about the distinction, as you know, but I don't see any mention about it in the case of state militias.
 * The Eichers give December 6, rather than December 7, as the date of termination for Clark's tenure as a state militia general. I assume that this is a typo, in fact, it may even be my typo since I think I gave you the citation to the dates when you were drafting the article. I changed the date.
 * I would have made the same comment as Hawkeye7 about splitting the last paragraph off as a separate later life section but you have addressed that and I won't take issue with your conclusion.
 * Since you have addressed all the comments in three other reviews and I have found nothing else that I think needs to be addressed, I am supporting promotion and will change the assessment on the talk page accordingly. Donner60 (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)