Talk:James Dillon Armstrong

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleJames Dillon Armstrong has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 18, 2023Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
March 25, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 12, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that James Dillon Armstrong was a Virginia state senator, a delegate to West Virginia's constitutional convention, and a circuit court judge while serving for more than 43 years as a Presbyterian church elder?
Current status: Good article

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 01:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Moved to mainspace by West Virginian (talk). Self-nominated at 20:05, 30 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/James Dillon Armstrong; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • I'm not sure how to word the hook, but perhaps a hook about him being a church elder for 40+ years in addition to his political career might make for a good hook? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:38, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article was new enough when nominated, and it is long enough. Earwig's tool is clear, and spotchecks reveal no verifiability or copyright concerns. Article is neutrally written, but I think the declined appointment to the leadership of the confederate army, and the subsequent pardon by Jackson, is worth mention. I would strongly prefer the alternative hook, but can a link for Presbytarian elder be found? The majority of our readers will have no idea what that is. Hook is cited. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:21, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The worry I have is that if elder is linked, the hook might turn into a sea of blue and thus could affect readership for Armstrong's article. Perhaps in such case, state senator and maybe some of the other links (not sure which ones exactly) could be delinked. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:21, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for your feedback, suggestions, and guidance. I will workshop a new hook within the next day to address your concerns. — West Virginian (talk) 23:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on the feedback provided above, I'm suggesting the following ALT hooks—ALT2 without blue links to avoid a sea of blue and ALT3 with additional facts suggested above.

— West Virginian (talk) 10:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm okay with either of the proposed new hooks, but my point about covering the confederate links in the lead remains. I'm not accusing you of anything, West Virginian, but to a reader like me who isn't an expert but has a passing knowledge of US history, seeing the content in the body but not the lead feels very odd and not neutral. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Vanamonde93, thank you for your comment. I've added additional information to the article's lead section. Please let me know if you have any further guidance or recommendations in the meantime. — West Virginian (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for addressing my concerns; GTG, with a strong preference on my part for ALT2 though there isn't a clear-cut reason to disallow the others. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vanamonde93, thank you for your review of this article and these hooks for DYK. I appreciate your time and thoughtful feedback. — West Virginian (talk) 22:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


GA Review[edit]

Passed. Steelkamp (talk) 12:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:James Dillon Armstrong/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 06:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'll be taking this review. I aim to get the review done within the next seven days. Steelkamp (talk) 06:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article criteria[edit]

Well written[edit]

Lead:

  • ...Virginia governor John Letcher... I believe that should be ...Virginia Governor John Letcher... as per MOS:JOBTITLES.

Early life and education:

  • Armstrong was admitted to the bar in Hampshire County,[3][8] and in 1844, he began practicing law in Romney.[3][8] Armstrong continued the practice of law in Romney until he was appointed to the bench in 1875.[3][8] Armstrong was a law partner of John B. White, son of his law teacher John Baker White,[13] and later had a law practice with Robert Wood Dailey Jr. until Armstrong took the bench in 1875. These three sentences all start with "Armstrong". This should be reworded to avoid that.

Political career:

  • ...Virginia governor John Letcher... Same as above. Governor should be capitalised.
  • Can you tell me what "county elector for Hampshire County" means? I am unsure.
  • I've modified this sentence for clarity. Please let me know if this works, or if it needs any further adjustment for further clarity. Thanks again! In April of that year, the Virginia Whig state convention appointed Armstrong to represent Virginia's 10th congressional district as an elector for the 1852 United States presidential election.[15][16] -- West Virginian (talk) 14:48, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • What was the purpose of the "committee for safety"? Can that be expanded?
  • I've added a description of the committee of safety based on the Maxwell and Swisher text. Please let me know if this suffices, or requires further clarification. Following the onset of the American Civil War in April 1861,[21] Armstrong began serving on Hampshire County's committee of safety alongside Isaac Parsons and Angus William McDonald.[22] The committee was established by a meeting of Hampshire County citizens for the purposes of ensuring the public good while the county prepared for armed conflict.[22] The committee continued to meet until May 29, 1861.[22] Hampshire County Court permitted Armstrong and Parsons to execute bonds for and on behalf of the county to raise money to fund "war purposes".[22] -- West Virginian (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Following the onset of the American Civil War... Can a year or month be provided here for those who don't know when the Civil War started?
  • and Armstrong was forbidden to practice law,[24] and was denied the right to vote by the Romney township registrar and Hampshire County board of registration. I would shorten this to and Armstrong was forbidden to practice law,[24] and denied the right to vote by the Romney township registrar and Hampshire County board of registration.
  • Thank you for this suggestion! I've modified this sentence accordingly. -- West Virginian (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In May 1857, Armstrong was elected to the Senate as a Whig,[19] and in May 1859, he was re-elected to the Senate as a Democrat. Should that be re-elected to the Senate as a Whig? Also, are these the only times that Armstrong was re-elected? Given his time in the senate from 1855 to 1864, surely he was re-elected more times than that.
  • I've rephrased this section as follows: In 1855, John C. B. Mullin resigned his seat in the Virginia Senate representing Hampshire, Hardy, and Morgan counties, and Armstrong became a Whig candidate for this seat.[17] Armstrong served in this Virginia Senate seat from the session beginning on December 3, 1855, until the session ending on March 10, 1864.[18] In May 1857, Armstrong was re-elected to the Senate as a Whig,[19] and in May 1859, he was re-elected to the Senate as a Democrat.[20] Armstrong was subsequently re-elected in 1861, and re-elected for his final term in 1863.[21] Please let me know if this requires any further adjustment in the meantime! -- West Virginian (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Judicial career:

  • Armstrong, Robert White, and J. W. F. Allen were candidates for the position of Judge of the 4th West Virginia Judicial Circuit... I think a date should be added to this sentence.
  • I added the year, and added the supporting citations for this statement. — West Virginian (talk) 01:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Armstrong and White withdrew in favor of Allen.[9] On December 24, 1875, Armstrong was appointed to serve as Judge of the 4th judicial circuit following the death of Allen. I recommend combining these two sentences. Armstrong and White withdrew in favor of Allen,[9]but on December 24, 1875, Armstrong was appointed to serve as Judge of the 4th judicial circuit following the death of Allen.
  • Thank you for this suggestion, which really helped to improve the flow. I've combined these sentences accordingly. — West Virginian (talk) 01:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life:

Death:

  • Armstrong's obituary in Hampshire Review... Should that be Armstrong's obituary in the Hampshire Review...?

Verifiable with no original research[edit]

  • References checked: 3, 8, 9, 18, 23, 24, 25, 30, 35, 40, 42, 48, 54. No source-text integrity issues were found.

Broad in its coverage[edit]

  • I think this article relies on the reader knowing about when West Virginia became a state and the events surrounding that. For example, it's not mentioned that the counties that Armstrong represented in the Virginia Senate became part of West Virginia in 1863, and (I assume) that is the reason why Armstrong left the Virginia Senate. Can that be explained within the article please.
  • I added the following sentence to the end of the paragraph regarding his senate tenure: However, on June 20, 1863, Armstrong's senate district, consisting of Hampshire, Hardy, and Morgan counties,[18] officially became part of the new state of West Virginia.[22][23] Please let me know if this requires any further modification. -- West Virginian (talk) 15:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...and Alexander W. Monroe was elected to represent Hampshire County. I'm not sure why this is mentioned? Does it have something to do with Armstrong?

Neutral[edit]

Stable[edit]

Illustrated, if possible[edit]

  • Are there any photographs of the man himself that can be used?
  • Other than that, the images are licenced correctly, and I'm glad to see alt text is being used.
  • I performed an exhaustive search for images of Armstrong and unfortunately, I was unable to locate an image of him. I will continue to be on the lookout for an image of Armstrong in the meantime. — West Virginian (talk) 01:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General[edit]

I've finished my first round of comments, and will put the review on hold now for my comments to be addressed. Steelkamp (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your thorough and thoughtful review! I am currently working to address these comments and will follow-up with you tomorrow with a status update. Thanks again! — West Virginian (talk) 22:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you again for your phenomenal review! I am about halfway through making the edits, and I hope to finish addressing the rest of your comments tomorrow. — West Virginian (talk) 01:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • First and foremost, Steelkamp, I would like to thank you again for taking the time to perform this thorough and comprehensive review. I apologize that it took me some time to address the comments. Please let me know if there is anything outstanding, or if there is anything that requires further modification in the meantime. Thank you again! -- West Virginian (talk) 15:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok. I'll have a look at the article within a day from now. Steelkamp (talk) 05:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for taking so much time, but I now think this article is ready to be passed. Good job! Steelkamp (talk) 12:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:James_Dillon_Armstrong&oldid=1215486534"