# Talk:Beriah Magoffin

This review is transcluded from Talk:Beriah Magoffin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi. I'm reviewing this article for GA, and the review will take at most 7 days (although it nearly certainly will not). I'm watching this page, so you have no need to notify me if you respond. I'll begin the review ASAP. Mm40 (talk) 01:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Here's the review. Feel free not to follow the suggestions, as that is why I'm posting them here instead of fixing them myself.

Lead: "...allow Speaker of the Senate John F. Fisk to succeed him." Succeed who? Magoffin? Although this is later in the article, this should be clarified in the lead.
Clarified by adding the office Fisk would succeed to.
Lead: "After the war, encouraged acceptance of the Union..." Missing a "he".
Added.
Early life: Although really not needed, readers may want to have a sentence about Samuel McAfee as he doesn't have his own article (but don't force yourself to do tons of additional research)
Samuel McAfee doesn't appear in The Kentucky Encyclopedia, although his father Robert and brother Robert Breckinridge McAfee do. Not sure Samuel really did anything particularly noteworthy other than being related to these notable folks. I think it might be a bit awkward to try and get into all these relationships regarding the subject's grandfather.
Early life: "Magoffin returned to Kentucky in 1839 due to ill health." There's a redundant word at the end end of the sentence. You should change it to either "illness" or simple cut ill.
"Ill health" is actually the wording used in the source, but it's not a big deal. I have changed to "due to an illness".
Early life: "Ten of the couple's children survived infancy." Does your source say how many children there were that didn't survive?
Unfortunately, no. Two sources mention that ten survived infancy, but none that I have found give the total number of children.
Early life: "Magoffin became actively involved in the Democratic Party, serving..." "actively involved" can be changed to "active" or "involved" to remove the redundant word
Done.
Early life: "...serving as a presidential elector in 1844, 1848, 1852, and 1856 and a delegate to the Democratic National Convention in 1848, 1856, 1860, and 1872." You need to add an "as" between "a" and "delegate", because right now the sentence reads as if Magoffin was helping a delegate as opposed to being one himself.
Done.
Governor of Kentucky: "In 1859, Magoffin was elected..." Do we know the exact date of the election and/or the day he took office? One of them (I assume the date he took office) is mentioned in the infobox. Preferably, both should be added.
At one time, gubernatorial elections in Kentucky spanned multiple days. Not sure if this had changed by 1859 or not. A quick glance over the sources doesn't reveal the election date, but I have added the date he took office.
(Not important for GA, maybe if you want to take the article to higher level) Governor of Kentucky: A rewrite seems to be in order for the entire second paragraph of this section, as it seems a bit long-winded and repetitious. You don't have to action this, but if you want to make the article the best it can be...
Believe me, I know, but I don't know exactly how to do it without listifying some of the prose, which seems like a bad idea. At this point, GA is my highest ambition for this article, so if you think it passes without tackling this, I'd prefer to leave it alone.
Governor of Kentucky: "...not return a fugitive slave obstructed a slave's return..." Missing an "or" between the first "slave" and "obstructed"
Done.
Governor of Kentucky: "in all current a future territories south of" "a" should be "and"
Done.
Governor of Kentucky: "...and the provision of some sort of protection for southern states in the U.S. Senate against oppressive slavery legislation." I suggest you change "provision of some sort of protection" to "protection of" and then "against" to "from"
Done.
Governor of Kentucky: "; consequently, they refused to call the convention." Change "call" to something else. Magoffin called it, not the Unionists. Change to "recognize"/"attend" etc.
Actually, Magoffin called the special session of the legislature; he did not have the authority to call a convention of the people. He called the legislature into session and asked them to call a convention of the people, but they refused.
Governor of Kentucky: "...but Magoffin also refused this request." I suggest changing "also refused this request." to "again refused" to remove redundant words and eliminate the second "request" in the sentence.
I have changed to "similarly refused him" because I think the article should reflect Magoffin's staunch adherence to neutrality on both sides.
Governor of Kentucky: "Again, they refused to call a convention..." Who's "they"? The Unionist majority? Also, you may want to change "call" again.
I have clarified the antecedent for "they". See above for clarification on "call".
Governor of Kentucky: "convention for determining the state's course in the war." Either replace "for determining" with "to determine" or cut out "for".
Done.
Governor of Kentucky: "...and the senate elevated Magoffin's choice, James F. Robinson to speaker." There should be a comma after "Robinson"
Done.
Later life and death: I think a sentence should be added at the end about the image to the right of the text (his gravestone, which the link says is considered a Civil War Monument. Just a bit about it's history will do.
Didn't realize this since I didn't add the image or that link, but I think I've addressed this now.
All images, ISBNs/OCLCs, check out ok, and there are no link disambiguation pages.
These are all the issues I have so I'm putting this on hold and giving you seven days to remedy these. Very nice article, and it will soon be a GA. Mm40 (talk) 11:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. I hope my inline responses above adequately address your concerns. Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 01:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I am passing the article now. Congratulations, and thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia. I hope you consider reviewing a nomination like this one. Cheers. Mm40 (talk) 11:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

One obvious point: the "intro" section was far too long and included a great deal of material that belonged in the article.

I do not think the lead was (is) "far too long". Based upon the guidelines given at WP:LEAD#Length, a two-paragraph lead is acceptable. While the current lead is three paragraphs, it could just as easily be made two by combining the short third paragraph with the second one.
An intro should give essential data and summarize the important points of the article; it should not go into details.
In this case - the intro includes obviously misplaced material such as the details of how it was arranged for Magoffin to select his successor.
This practically duplicated a section of the main article, and in fact was over half of the "intro".

I think it's important that the reader know that Magoffin hand-selected his successor; that's part of what makes him interesting and notable. It's the only time it ever happened in the state's 200+ year history. And if we mention that he hand-selected his successor, then we have to explain why the normal chain of succession was not followed.
Moreover, I think it is manifestly clear that Magoffin would not have resigned absent this provision. If I read that a politician resigned, I'd like to know why. Failing to mention the conditions of his resignation leaves the reader with the false impression that he just decided it wasn't worth fighting with the Unionist legislature and gave up, which was not the case.
All that said, if the lead must be trimmed, here's what I would suggest doing with the second paragraph:

In special elections held in June 1861, Unionists captured nine of Kentucky's ten congressional seats and obtained two-thirds majorities in both houses of the state legislature. Despite Magoffin's strict adherence to the policy of neutrality, [T]he Unionist legislators did not trust [Magoffin] and routinely overrode his vetoes. Unable to provide effective leadership [under these conditions]due to a hostile legislature, Magoffin agreed to resign as governor in 1862, provided he could choose his successor. Lieutenant governor Linn Boyd had died in office, and Magoffin refused to allow Speaker of the Senate John F. Fisk to succeed him as governor. Accordingly, Fisk resigned and the Kentucky Senate elected Magoffin's choice, James F. Robinson, as speaker. Magoffin then resigned, Robinson ascended to the governorship, and Fisk was re-elected as Speaker of the Senate.

This narrative - in both places - referred to the "Speaker of the Senate", which is wrong (the House has a Speaker, the Senate has a President Pro Tem).

Not under the 1850 Constitution, which was the one in force at the time of these events. See here (page 51, the second paragraph under "Gubernatorial Provisions"). In the 1891 constitution, it was changed to President Pro Tem of the Senate and made a permanent office, but it was essentially the same position. As this document points out, the change was economically motivated so that the Senate would not have to convene in the event of a vacancy in the lieutenant governor's office. What this document doesn't mention is that, until 1992, the lieutenant governor's absence from the state constituted a (temporary) vacancy in his office, so this was a very real concern.
The intro also duplicated other pieces of the main article, and lacked key information, such as Magoffin's party affiliation.

The party affiliation can be worked in I'm sure, but the lead will, of a necessity, duplicate other parts of the main article. Per WP:LEAD: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article ... The lead should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies." I don't think you can do that without duplicating content.
The other main part of this edit was to convert the references to a consistent useful format.

Maybe you can elaborate on your issue with the references. I'm sure we can reach some agreement there.
I do see one thing that I should have done differently: the link to the NPS document on the Magoffin Monument should have been preserved - but as an in-line reference only.

I think it does no harm to have the link both in-line and in the bibliography, but this will be a minor quibble, I think.
Yes, I prefer short paragraphs and sentences. I find them much easier to read.

We can talk about specific instances, but per WP:BETTER#Paragraphs: "One-sentence paragraphs are unusually emphatic, and should be used sparingly." I count eight such paragraphs in your revision.
Rich Rostrom (Talk) 05:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Responses in-line above. Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 15:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Beriah Magoffin. 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/20110721082602/http://image1.nps.gov:9001/StyleServer/calcrgn?cat=NRHP&item=Text%2FNRHP-24f2c512613649139708d5957cfdc59e.djvu&style=nps%2FFOCUS-DJview.xsl&wid=640&hei=480&oif=jpeg&props=item%28SUMMARY%2CCOPYRIGHT%29%2Ccat%28Name%29&page=0 to http://image1.nps.gov:9001/StyleServer/calcrgn?cat=NRHP&item=Text%2FNRHP-24f2c512613649139708d5957cfdc59e.djvu&style=nps%2FFOCUS-DJview.xsl&wid=640&hei=480&oif=jpeg&props=item%28SUMMARY%2CCOPYRIGHT%29%2Ccat%28Name%29&page=0
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318115129/http://digital.library.louisville.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=%2Fetd&CISOPTR=562&CISOBOX=1&REC=9 to http://digital.library.louisville.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=%2Fetd&CISOPTR=562&CISOBOX=1&REC=9
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)