Talk:Edward Low

George Roberts

Seems to be some disagreement between the article and the pullquote as to whether George Roberts really existed or was a fictional construct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.44.4 (talk) 15:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

GA passed

I think this is a good and interesting article that is very close to GA standard. I particularly like the layout in the body of the article, where there are relevant quotations down the right hand side. Very nice. I do have a few points to raise though, before I list the article as a GA.

• The last chapter of the Brutality section, starting "A snow called the Unity was added to the fleet ..." seems to have nothing to do with brutality.
• In the paragraph above that, there's a sentence that starts "Leslie described Low as a psychopath ...". It would be nice to be given some idea of what Leslie's expertise is at that point. For instance, "Historian Edward Leslie ..."
• The Captain section starts off "Low abandoned his plans off the coast of Brazil, and moved on to the Caribbean ..." What plans did he abandon? I don't see anything preceding that to explain what his plans were in going to Brazil.
• The Captain section doesn't seem to sit well. It's very short, and it's a bit confusing, as George Roberts is variously described as Captain George Roberts, and a mate on the British ship King Sagamore. If this was a meeting after Low had captured the Pink, wouldn't the meeting have taken place aboard the renamed Rose Pink?
• I'm a little bit dubious about potential POV statements like "... terrorised the Azores ..", and more particularly "One of Low's most particularly noted episodes of sadism ...". Brutality certainly, but sadism? That implies some degree of sexual satisfaction for the act. Is there any evidence for that?
• I think there's some serious overlinking in the article. For instance, man of war is linked twice in the last chapter of the Brutality section; rum is linked in the last paragraph of the Life in Boston section; silk is linked in the Flags section; in the sentence "Low was rescued by a France ship ..." French is linked to France; rigger links to a disambiguation page, none of the entries on which seem to be relevant to Low's job.
• Low's brother was "... was hung at Tyburn for thievery, but Low himself was "... hanged ... in Martinique ..." "The men were hung for felony, piracy and robbery ..." As a British English speaker, I prefer "hanged", but whichever is chosen, it ought to be consistent.
• In the Piracy section for instance, in the paragraph beginning "He sank the other ships of the fleet, and abandoned the Rebecca. The Boston News Letter of 9 July 1722 published a list of those captured by Low. A number of the fishermen were forced to join Low, including Philip Ashton who later escaped in May 1723 ..." the dates aren't linked consistently. In one case the full date is only partially linked and a month/year (May 1723) isn't linked. I believe that there may be some debate over the value of wikilinking full dates, but whatever decision is made should be made consistently.

I don't see any other issues with this article in regard to the good article criteria; it appears to be stable, written from a neutral point of view, broad coverage with plenty of relevant references, and with appropriate copyright information for all images. So I'm putting the article on hold pending some agreement on the specific issues I've raised above. Well done to all the editors. --Malleus Fatuarum 14:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Haha, that would pretty much be me. Thanks. I'll fiddle with it. Neil ム 17:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as the suggestions go, all done except two; the sadism one - sadism means "experiencing pleasure at the pain of others", or "enjoying the pain of others"; this does not have to mean sexual pleasure. Terrorise means to "instil terror" - do not get confused with "terrorism", the use of which can have POV issues depending on context. The dates are consistently linked - day/month linked (so we get 4 October or October 4), year never linked. Neil ム 17:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• Stand-alone years ought not to be linked certainly, but years as part of a full date ought to be, especially where the day and month are linked as they are in this article, as per wp:date#Autoformatting and linking.
• On the "sadism" issue, nobody can know what drove Low to his excesses of cruelty. Perhaps he derived no pleasure at all from it, but simply did it to instill fear in others. The text suggests that he carried out the act described as "sadism" in rage. That's very different from deriving pleasure from it.
• So far as the "terrorised" issue is concerned, I won't stick on that. I haven't confused it with terrorism, and it's certainly a plausible claim to make in any case. --Malleus Fatuarum 18:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

A few issues (yes, I have issues!):

• Is 'Rhode Island sloop' intended to describe where the ship was from, or is it the name of a specific type of sloop?
• The list of Commands in the infobox doesn't seem right. From reading the article, I get:

• Rebecca
• Rose Pink
• Ranger
• Fancy
• Merry Christmas

• Most links in the 'See also' section are already listed within the article.
• Is his death the subject of much speculation, or is it the manner, place, time, etc of his death? Picky I know, but I still don't like that sentence.

Maralia 19:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

To summarise where we are with this review, I will list this article as a GA if two outstanding issues are addressed:

• the sadism claim is either substantiated or removed.
• full dates are either consistently autoformatted, or not.

--Malleus Fatuarum 20:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Lots of points!

• • Sadism - changed to cruelty (it's repeated earlier, but I've run out of synonyms). The first rquote probably substantiates it (mirth, but it's really not a big deal.
  • Years - hmm, I thought dates like this: "4 October 2007" were fine. The MOS on that must have changed since I last looked at it about 18 months ago(!), I'll delink them.
  • Rhode Island sloop - refers to sloops that were a part of the "Rhode Island Navy". Nothing to suggest they were different in any physical way to normal sloops. ([1], [2], [3], [4]).
  • List of commands - it's probably never going to be complete, because as best I can gather, Low changed ships a lot. But the Ranger was definitely captained by Low at one point, I'll add it.
  • See alsos - fixed. I'd like to keep Piracy in the Caribbean there as it's piped in the article.
  • Death - let's go with "There are conflicting reports on the circumstances of Edward Low's death" - okay to you?

Phew! You guys are tough. Neil ム 20:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Death - I'm happy with your rephrased statement above; however the sentence I really had issues with was 'His death, in around 1724, has been the subject of much speculation' which still remains in the lede. Maralia 20:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Baaaargh, missed that. Changed to match. Neil ム 20:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Tough but fair I hope. I think this is a great article, and I'm going to promote it to GA. --Malleus Fatuarum 20:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Qapla'! Neil ム 21:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

A Star Trek fan as well as a pirate fan. Congratulations on what you've done with this article. --Malleus Fatuarum 21:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• • The only pirates i know in my lifetime are Captain Hook and Captain Jack Sparrow. So, uh, nice meeting Ed Low. Fleurbutterfly 13:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Resources

• Area History: Chapters 4 - 5, Vol II - Watson's Annals of Philadelphia And Pennsylvania, 1857
• NYT article for quotes

No stopping now! Neil ム 21:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion pre FA nomination

You've probably been through an FA nomination before, in which case I'm teaching my granny to suck eggs. But just in case you haven't, I'll warn you that the reviewers can be very picky.

Breaches of the MOS like this – 28 May 1722 – will have have them jumping up and down in excitement waving their "Oppose 1a)"s. As I understand the MOS, the rule is that full dates should be autoformatted, and so should day and month. So the example I quoted ought to be 28 May 1722; it's only years on their own that ought not to be wikilinked, not years as part of a full date. --Malleus Fatuarum 22:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done And yeah, but believe it or not, the last FA nomination I went through was almost 2 years ago(!), and for an entirely different topic. Neil ム 09:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You're obviously a man of very catholic tastes. Good luck with the FA review. --Malleus Fatuarum 13:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

"Good Quarters to be given when Craved"

Is "quarters" mercy or lodgings? jnestorius^(talk) 01:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Introduction

The New York Times reference in the introduction should be accompanied by a source citation (in my opinion). Not a biggie, but would add just that much more credibility to a good article--Thanks75.68.192.62 (talk) 02:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Expanding on this, I caught myself wonder what year the NYT made this comment. I think many readers, like myself, may not be clear on just how long some papers have been around, and may wonder if it was an of-the-times comment, or something printed in retrospect. Dxco (talk) 05:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Why is Arthur Conan Doyle description of Edward Low mentioned? he was not a contemporary and as far as I can see from the wiki article on Doyle. Was he an expert on pirates somehow? 77.1.109.219 (talk) 11:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Low was fairly unheard of, and never received the kind of attention and "media treatment" that Edward Teach or Stede Bonnet have received, which is why I decided to write the article. Very few people as notable as Conan Doyle have ever written about him. Neıl 龱 23:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Kudos!

I came accross this article from the front page FA section, and really enjoyed it! It was concise and to the point, but as well had a nice flavor to it, where the authors allowed a touch of saltiness to it by relying on quotes that contain terminology of the time. A fun read. Good job!Dxco (talk) 05:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Date of Death?

The opening sentence gives 1724 as the date of Low's death, yet in the Death section there is no conclusive proof of when he died? Markb (talk) 10:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

• • they said it's "disputed". Fleurbutterfly 13:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

More ships than noted?

About halfway through the page, in the "Capsizing of the Rose Pink section, the text reads [edited]

"and his fleet of two ships (the Rose Pink and the Fancy,...... and Low—now captaining the schooner Squirrel"

Fine, he had two vessels, neither had that final name, so where did the Squirrel come from? --Dumarest (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I've expanded the sentence to clarify this. Neıl 龱 17:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Rephrase?

"Following the death of his wife during childbirth in late 1719, he became a pirate two years later, " - this is badly phrased. Perhaps "He became a pirate in 1921, two years after the death of his wife during childbirth" or similar? 217.34.222.220 (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It should be two separate sentences: one idea per sentence. We do not know if the death of his wife contributed to his decision to become a pirate or if it was unrelated. Monado (talk) 14:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"Scoundrel" is an opinion

Is there an agreed-on definition for "scoundrel" for which Edward Low qualified during his time as a thief? Can we find another word that conveys the idea of socially inappropriate conduct but which is not a value judgement? Do we have more information about his activities that we can use here? "Thief" indicates that he stole. Is there another action noun we can pair with it? Did he fight? Kidnap? Intimidate? Monado (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Definition of scoundrel: "a villain, a rogue". Based on the "Early life" section, yes, "scoundrel" is an appropriate term. Neıl 龱 16:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Orientation

Edward Low was a Homosexual, correct? That's what I remember from school.66.142.195.205 (talk) 16:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

1. You need a reliable source for your assertion
2. It doesn't belong in the "See also" section any more than "heterosexuality" belongs in the Bill Gates article.-Wafulz (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it doesn't belong in the 'see also' section; the article on homosexuality doesn't appear to say anything about Edward Low, and if he was indeed gay, that should be discussed and sourced within the body of the article rather than just linking to the term. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You need a reliable source for your facts. I heard about this too and went to school on the east coast. It's going to be hard to find citations for that statement. I suppose if a celebrity said it in an interview or put it in a magazine it could be used. Lawtonlawdawg (talk) 16:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Time problem

In the second paragraph, the phrasing suggests that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and the New York Times were contemporaneous with Low; but of course Low was long dead before either Doyle or the NYT came to be. I'd suggest either replacing these quotes with contemporary sources; or at the very least, starting the sentence with something like "Two centuries later, Doyle described Low as . . . ." Otherwise it's rather misleading to the casual reader.Textorus (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

How does it suggest they were contemporaneous with Low? I don't find it misleading. I am probably biased as I wrote it, of course. Neıl 龱 22:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Urgent - Vandalism?

My undo of vandalism was reverted by a very experienced & reputable admin Epbr123 - but I can still see the 'vandalism' namely using table cells at the very bottom of the article to display very large (albeit pixellated) lewd images (after Guide to Edward Low in the external links). Could someone please check - am I the only one seeing this & if so how? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IvorE (talk • contribs) 19:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I am also seeing these extremely lewd images (as of 20:26 BST), But I am new to Wikipedia and do not know how to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.9.70 (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad I wan't seeing things. I must apologise though: in my desire to remove the images I think I deleted a valid part of the article (the Pirates and Privateers related links). The article seems OK now (20:55 BST) but I'm still curious how the retard managed to create the 'images' on the page.IE (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ed vs. Ned

Several users have changed the nickname mentioned from "Ned" to "Ed". All of the sources that I have checked linked from this article mention either "Ned Low" or "Edward Low". Can anyone provide references for the changes to "Ed"? — λ (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

There are none. I hesitate to call it vandalism, but even if it's well-meaning, it is wholly incorrect. Neıl 龱 22:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

More ships than noted?

About halfway through the page, in the "Capsizing of the Rose Pink section, the text reads [edited]

"and his fleet of two ships (the Rose Pink and the Fancy,...... and Low—now captaining the schooner Squirrel"

Fine, he had two vessels, neither had that final name, so where did the Squirrel come from? --Dumarest (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I've expanded the sentence to clarify this. Neıl 龱 17:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.58.104.33 (talk)

His brother

The article briefly refers to Ned's brother ("The brother later took to other forms of criminal activity and ended up hanged at Tyburn for 'thievery'."). His crime would probably be called burglary or similar today. Richard Low was found guilty of "breaking open the dwelling House of Captain John Guyon" and of "breaking open the dwelling-House of Jacob Curtis." His accomplices in these two cases were William Davis, Joseph Montisano, John Hall and Stephen Bunch. All ended up in the gallows at Tyburn, as per the Old Bailey proceedings of 10 December 1707. (Source: http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?path=sessionsPapers%2F17071210.xml) Idontcareanymore (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

That's really good, thank you. I've put it in the article. fish&karate 10:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Edward Low. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011031042/http://www.piratesinfo.com/main.php to http://www.piratesinfo.com/main.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.larryvoyer.com/Piratical/pirate%20pages/banknotes-antiqua.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edward Low. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225150421/http://portfolio.agnesscott.edu/rscoggins/freshman/fall/fys/piratesresearch.doc to http://portfolio.agnesscott.edu/rscoggins/freshman/fall/fys/piratesresearch.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)