# Talk:Staten Island Peace Conference

This review is transcluded from Talk:Staten Island Peace Conference/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Edge3 (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! I am the reviewer for this article.
A few comments:

"Two brothers, Admiral Lord Richard Howe and General William Howe, were given command of the naval and land aspects of the operation." -- Should "respectively" be added at the end?
"powers that might be seen as granting relief to the colonial demands for relief" -- "relief" shows up twice in this sentence.
"King George III reluctantly agreed to grant the Howes limited powers..." -- Should that sentence begin with a phrase like "At first..." or "Initially..."?
Background section, paragraph 2: "He did also point out to the admiral..." -- I think "also pointed out" works better in this sentence.
"Adams for one did not believe the conference would amount to anything." -- Doesn't the source state that all three delegates felt the same way?
"...he agreed to the American demand that they be recognized as official representatives of the Congress." -- I may have interpreted the source incorrectly, but doesn't it say that the Howe "might regard this committee in whatever light he pleased", and that the Congress would send the delegation no matter how Howe received it?
Ah! I just verified it in the Morris source. If the above statement is indeed unverifiable with the Fiske source alone, then please add another one.
Where does it say in the sources that the meeting lasted 3 hours?
"Lord Howe unhappily stated he could not view the American delegates as anything but British subjects" -- I sense a double negative somewhere in there. Perhaps you should remove "anything but"?
"Your lordship may consider me in what light you please, except that of a British subject" -- An ellipsis is needed to indicate the part of the quotation that you omitted.
In the Aftermath section: "They were authorized to treat with Congress as a body" -- remove "with"
Thanks for working on such an interesting and informative article! I look forward to your response. Edge3 (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed review (and your sharp-eyed observation that Morris didn't say how long the conference was).  As far as Howe's recognition of the committee, I suspect the language in Fiske is closer to what was decided (i.e. they didn't care how Howe receivede them), but the secondary sources are ambiguous on this point.  I've left the sentence as is, and added the necessary cite to Morris. If there's anything else (or I managed to miss something), please let me know. Magic♪piano 01:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
All of the issues seem to have been addressed, after a minor correction I just made. The additional revisions you made are much appreciated! I'm passing this for GA. Cheers! Edge3 (talk) 02:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Magic♪piano 02:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

It's been four years since the GA review up above, so I'm putting this in a new section.  Two of the comments are incorrect (the "Lord Howe unhappily stated ..." sentence is definitely not a double negative, and says exactly what it should say; and "treat with Congress" is correct, "treat" here being an intransitive verb meaning "negotiate"), and since the original wording strikes me as more elegant than the workarounds that have replaced them, I'm replacing them.  I think these are pretty minor changes, but I do think they make the article better.  Binabik80 (talk) 20:40, 29 October 2014 (UTC)