# Talk:Charles H. Constable

Nice work on this article! One quibble from the copyeditor: please try to keep the naming consistent. In some sections, it's just "Constable," and in others it's "Judge Constable" – and I'm not actually sure when he officially became a judge(?) I'd prefer just "Constable," since it applies at all points in his life. Thx :) Accedietalk to me 05:01, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, just "Constable" is correct, and the frequent use of "Judge Constable" in this article is incorrect. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies#Subsequent use. --Stfg (talk) 08:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I've applied that, and also the MOS rule for block quotations. --Stfg (talk) 08:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Charles H. Constable/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 19:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll be happy to do this review. I'll begin with a close readthrough of the article, noting any initial issues I can't fix myself here, and then move to the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


### Initial readthrough
This looks fairly solid overall--readable and interesting, with a few citations and clarifications needed (below). Apologies in advance if some of this is rather picky!
*"This anger was unfounded" -- this seems like editorializing; I would just say "Constable argued that legal precedent supported his decision ..." 

Changed.
"Constable and his wife were described as good and honest people" --by who? If the only source is their nephew's diaries, this should be clearly indicated in the text.
Changed.
"Because of this donation, many scholars and historians were able to study these papers." -- needs citation
Changed.  Added References.
"During this time, he and his family became close to Abraham Lincoln and his family." -- needs citation
Changed. Added Reference and reworded.
"judges in Coles County ruled against Lincoln" -- what court was this case tried in? I'm surprised there were multiple judges
Changed.  Deleted plural ending.
"Constable was not selected for a judgeship; however, around 1853, he moved with his family to Marshall, Illinois, where he became a circuit judge and notable jurist." -- so how did he get a judgeship without being selected for a judgeship? Also, "notable jurist" seems like peacocking per WP:PEA; I would suggest either clearly attributing this to a secondary source, or just removing the phrase.
Changed.  Added reference, reworded, and added additional information.
Don't repeat links more than once after the lead section, per WP:REPEATLINK. (Note that this isn't a GA criteria, so you don't have to do this now--just letting you know.)
Changed.  Did the changes address your concerns?
"Mr. Constable, I understand you perfectly, and have noticed for some time that you have been slowly and cautiously picking your way over to the Democratic party." -- this needs a citation immediately following the quotation (I assume it's from the McKirdy?)
Changed.  Added reference.
*"was elected vice president of an organization that opposed Lincoln during a rally of more than 40,000 people" -- this seems a bit ambiguous--did the organization oppose Lincoln during a rally? Or was CHC elected during the rally? What was the purpose of this rally?

Changed. Clarified information.
This could still use clarification for me--I didn't explain my concern well above. The problem is with the placement of the modifier "during a rally of..."; it's not clear if this is modifying "opposed Lincoln" or "organization that opposed Lincoln", if that makes sense. Perhaps it could be moved to the start of the sentence: "During a rally of more than 40,000 people in Springfield, Illinois, Constable was elected to a leadership position of an organization setup to oppose the polices of Lincoln." Would that capture the meaning correctly? -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Changed.  Sorry about the confusion.
*"that they had no right to arrest the deserters in the sovereign state of Illinois" -- ambiguous pronoun --who is "they" here?

Changed.
"by appearing during the court sessions" -- the plural confuses me here-- did the Col. come during multiple sessions, or should this just be "a court session"?
Changed.
"the excessive troops" -- "excessive" is editorializing a bit--can another phrase be found? (or how about just "the troops"?)
Changed.  Deleted excessive.
"Constable's arrest resulted in widespread condemnation " -- perhaps add "of his actions"? I assume the sense here is that it's Constable who was widely condemned, not his arrest.
Changed.  Clarified and added additional information.
"his rescue of the Union soldiers who had been arrested for kidnapping the deserters" -- this is the first mention that the Union soldiers were arrested. Did Constable order their arrest?
Changed.
"and eventually led to his trial" -- is it possible to add an approx date of this trial?
Changed. Added trial date.
" The case is still noted by legal scholars and historians" -- for what reason? 
Changed.
* "under threat of violence" -- the placement of this modifier invites the presumable misreading that the Union soldiers were under threat of violence.

Changed. Rearranged wording.
"The opinion of Hinde supporting his uncle Constable has legal merit" --this should be prefaced with something like "According to X," or "Legal scholar Janet Z argues that..."
Changed.
-- Khazar2 (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
*I think there's a typo with the math in this section--would you check the dates (1861 -13 = 1858)? "In 1858, Constable ran in a special election to fill a vacant seat of the Illinois Supreme Court, but was defeated by Pinckney H. Walker by a vote margin of 229 votes to 95.[16] Thirteen years later Constable ran again and was elected as a state circuit court judge of the Illinois 4th circuit in 1861." -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Changed.
Okay, I think that does it. The last thing I want you to look at is a change I just made to put this section in chronological order [1]. If that looks right to you, I'm ready to sign off. Thanks for your quick responses to the points above. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
That looks much better, thanks.


### Checklist
Please add more to Constable's ruling. This is not clear to me - why wouldn't the military have jurisdiction over the soldiers no matter where they were, since they were not in Illinois legally? Parkwells (talk) 19:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)