# Talk:John Horsefield

There is only one Horsefield recorded as living in the Whitefield area during the relevant timescale and of an appropriate age. That person is recorded as "Jno. Horsfield" in the 1851 UK census, is slap-bang in the Besses o' th' Barn area (what was then "Narrow Lane" is now "Victoria Avenue"/"Victoria Lane"). The recorded person is married to an "Esther", who is of the correct age also. I dare not enter this information in the article because it relies on primary sources but, bearing in mind that I have in the past been asked by people who think that they may have a family connection when writing articles such as this, the relevant paper trail can be found from UK census Class: HO107; Piece: 2216; Folio: 395; Page: 54; GSU roll: 87226.
Furthermore, there is this from a doctor who attended at his (sounds rather painful) death. - Sitush (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I think the last paragraph of "Early life" should be removed; or, at least, stop at the first note. All of that info on women attending being banned from botanical meetings is interesting, but does not really seem related to Horsefield himself (unless we have reason to believe that he was somehow part of the movement to exclude them). Qwyrxian (talk) 02:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Removed. The source that I had hoped would elucidate the issue has turned up and does not. - Sitush (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I think that this is too bulky for the article but it took some digging out & so I'll leave it here just in case it is of use in the future. Swain's poem on the death of Horsefield was:"Daffodil Notes". The Garden: an illustrated weekly journal of gardening in all its branches. 26: 382.
Ye who behold God's works in Nature's ways,
And find in flowers mute anthems to His praise,
Who read the volume of eternal love
In seeds of earth, as in the stars above,
Here read a name, whose fame shall long endure,
One of poor birth, but gifted, although poor.
God, unlike man, the humblest spirit lifts,
Nor asks his wealth before He sends His gifts.
Where'er botanic science could be learned,
New links disclosed, new species yet discerned,
Where'er by wood, or lane, or heath, or hill
God open'd the book that taught botanic skill;
There Horsefield's foot from dawn to eve was seen
To learn, to teach, to be what he has been—
An honour to the soil that gave him birth,
A mind of truth, a heart instinct with worth.
Oh ! may the spirit for whose loss we grieve
Our God accept—our Saviour Lord receive.
-Sitush (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Horsefield/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll review this soon. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
review
This is a wonderful article on an interesting man with fascinating insights into the times. I found a few issues to mention to you:
Thank you. There are plans afoot to expand the coverage of these Lancashire botanists & the artisan/popular science movement of the time. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
"a journalist, amateur botanist and the first chairman of the Manchester Cryptogamic Society,[3] says he received some education " -  "says" should be "said" -past tense; the "he" is Horsefield?
I have fixed the subject issue but have not yet sorted out the tense. I think that I usually get away with present tense for all sources but it is no big deal and I'll sort it out before the night is over. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I don't want to go made about this but, for example, at James Tod (a FA of which I am by far the major contributor) I say things such as Crooke also says that Tod's "knowledge of ethnology was imperfect ... William Crooke (another of mine) died a long time ago. - Sitush (talk) 21:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
"This instruction took the form of the employees reading out lessons while they worked at their handlooms."  - not quite understanding - the employess were working at the handlooms and (at the same time) reading the lessons out loud to Horsefield? (for which the weaver charged his employees two shillings?)
Yes, you have understood it correctly. I cannot see how to make this any more clear - it is a seemingly bizarre situation. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
"thus meeting a broad church of people" - don't understand the "broad church" part.
I have linked broad church - it could be changed to "wide range" or something, I guess. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I think there should be a colon before a quote e.g. "had such sympathies and recounted:" [blockquote] and "Horsefield explained the didactic purpose of these societies:" [blockquote], (removing "that" and "as").
Some do, some don't. I never have and cannot recall it being raised as an issue. Is there anything in MOS about this? That thing is so big it is sometimes difficult to track things down, but I would guess WP:MOSQUOTE. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
might help to add a little context as to who Richard Buxton was, without the reader having to click the link
Yes, my mistake. Now done, but you may think the sentence clumsy. - Sitush (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
"This change was necessary, says Horsefield, as previously the president" - not sure how to handle this one - maybe the leading sentence and quote need to be changed, as it seems awkward to have a blockquote taking up in the middle of a sentence.
I have amended with this edit.Is that ok? - Sitush (talk) 21:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Also, should use past tense "said" instead of "says".
See my comment above re: the Tod FA. - Sitush (talk) 21:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
link orrery
It was already linked in the preceding para. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
"teetotal Hobson" - teetotaler?
I am not sure that I understand your point here. He was a teetotaler but his state was teetotal. I'll have to get my dictionary out, but I fairly sure that it is acceptable. Certainly "the teetotaler Hobson" is not going to work in that sentence without jigging it around a bit. - Sitush (talk) 21:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Prestwich & Whitefield Heritage Society, Information received from researchers of the Prestwich & Whitefield Heritage Society, based on parish records has an error: "Harv error: There is no link pointing to this citation." I haven't figured out how to fix it yet.
Can you check it again, please? I spotted that the very next citation was mangled for some reason, so perhaps it was that which was throwing the error. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Do you think all those red links are going to get articles? e.g.  some of the publications?
I would like to think the books would because they are seminal publications, but I will not be writing them & so have unlinked. I may well do the Cryptogamic Society, after I waded through Leopold Hartley Grindon and a few other stubs I created while doing this one. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Maybe a mention of his life of extreme poverty should be in the lede, as it's threaded throughout the article.
Indeed. That is a good call. I have made quite a few adjustments to the lede and trust that it is now more to your liking. I have often admitted to being not good at writing that section - some sort of mental block. - Sitush (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Very nicely written!
I had a couple of very good copyeditors on board these last few days - J3Mrs and Richerman can take some credit for that. It wouldn't surprise me if Malleus Fatuorum also cast an eye. - Sitush (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
MathewTownsend (talk) 19:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
(copied from my talk page) I don't think any of the issues are worth arguing about or preventing a GA. Perhaps the blockquote issue bothers me the most, but probably there's no fixed rule, so ..... I'll drop it. This man and these botanists are wonderful to read about. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for  criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

B. Complies with  MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Provides references to all sources: 

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed: 

B. Remains focused: 

Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Very nice! Congratulations.  MathewTownsend (talk) 21:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts, and thanks also to the several people who have assisted in this particular venture over the last few months. These stories need to be told. - Sitush (talk) 23:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I think Br'er Rabbit did a little clean up so there's no longer the harb error message. The citation situation looks much better!  MathewTownsend (talk) 13:01, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the error was fixed, but there was also some completely unnecessary changes to style of headings and ref names - it just adds clutter in the edit box and I am tempted to revert that particular bit. However, I am hopeful that there is a good rationale and so have asked. - Sitush (talk) 13:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Br'er Rabbit said the problem was the link was missing, thus the error. He said "that cite is enabled for harv linking, but nothing is doing so. The script is just telling you that." You might want to contact him to make sure it's done right. He's very good with citations; he formats them for the ease of the reader, so the reader can click to the citation rather than hunt through dense lists manually.
By the way did you see my note to you on my talk page on Fertilisation of Orchids? MathewTownsend (talk) 13:01, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I contacted him here. Not seen your note - will go look now! - Sitush (talk) 13:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I just replied in some detail on my talk. This is useful and needful improvement. Please leave it be. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on John Horsefield. 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/20150108150958/http://www.honeybees-by-the-sea.com/grindon.pdf to http://www.honeybees-by-the-sea.com/grindon.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://daffodilusa.org/pdfs/Croft%20Originals%2C%20The%20Garden%20March%202011.pdf
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) 01:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The edit that I reverted here included a claim that William Bally made a death mask. I know that some of the other changes in that edit were not in accordance with the sources but I thought perhaps the bit about Bally might indeed be in the Manchester Guardian of 10 March 1854 as stated. It wasn't, nor indeed does it appear to be anywhere in that newspaper, so I am curious regarding where the quote came from.
The contributor only made that one edit but I have no reason to think that they were other than a misguided newbie, ie: it wasn't intended as a hoax etc. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)