Talk:The Essex Gazette

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New article[edit]

New article: Added sources and content welcomed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allreet and Randy Kryn: new article, assistance of any kind welcomed. GrayfeII (talk) 00:31, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GrayfeII, @Gwillhickers, and @Randy Kryn: Hall may have published The New England Chronicle in Boston for only a short time before selling it. The new owner changed the name to Independent Chronicle. I found this information in a lengthy article at a blog, Tarquin Tar's Bookcase.
This raises the question, since the Independent Chronicle was published for over 60 years, 1776-1840, does it make sense to have a separate article on its predecessor? On that question, I have no opinion and thus no objection to having two closely related articles. Allreet (talk) 04:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Gazette article will focus on the newspaper, while Hall's biography will do likewise. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 04:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okie doke. Cheers. Allreet (talk) 04:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's Part 1 and Part 2 of the article from the Tarquin Tar's Bookcase. Part 3 (the first link I provided) mentions the following source which you might find helpful: Harriet Tapley's History of the First Fifty Years of Printing in Salem, aka Salem Imprints, 1768-1825. Allreet (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I took a peek at Tapley's history. Turns out Hall was a partner with "Widow Franklin", Anne Franklin, who took over the printing house of James Franklin, Ben's brother. The plot thickens. Allreet (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes it does. I'm still in the process of building the article, but yes, Hall is interwoven in part of the Franklin history, which I hope to expand on without getting to far afield from Hall. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:45, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Allreet: I just took a good gander at Tapley, 1927. Looks great. Hall and the Essex Gazette are mentioned numerous times throughout. Great find. I'm adding it to the sources in both the Hall and Essex articles. Many thanks! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opening image[edit]

The data at the image upload page indicate the emblem is from an 1850 book (the book has an 1850 publication date), published before the date of this Gazette. A mistake somewhere. Good page, thanks for writing it. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:35, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: — Thanks, The Essex Gazette was first issued in 1768. The image is from a reliable source], dated 1850. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 04:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my mistake, mixing centuries up. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:26, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Randy Kryn: No worries, thanks for looking in. Your help is always welcomed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK 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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emblem of The Essex Gazette
Emblem of The Essex Gazette
  • ... that The Essex Gazette was established in 1768 becoming Salem's first newspaper, used as a voice against British rule just before the American Revolution?  Source: Tapley, 1927, p. 5;  Thomas, 1874, 177;   Buckingham, 1850 p. 217
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Juliet Rice Wichman
    • Comment: Statements and sources supporting hook are found in the 1st and 6th paragraphs of the 'History' section.
      There are a couple of long quotes in the article, resulting in similarities in the article and the sources.

Created by Gwillhickers (talk). Self-nominated at 19:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • @Howard the Duck: — QPQ completed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Article:
    • Newness: Green tickY Created on October 16, nominated on October 23; was nominated within the 7 days of creation.
    • Length: Green tickY 4,527 characters; more than long enough.
    • Within policy: Green tickY No glaring issues. Earwig flags this as "violation possible" with a 43.2% similarity but that's on the rather long quotation in the prose. I suppose that, it being similar, and the lengthy quote on the article, are both fine; the quotation helps in determining what the aims were.
    Hook:
    • Format Green tickY Short and meets the formatting guidelines
    • Content Red XN The hook as nominated cites Tapley, 1927 p. 5; Thomas, 1874, p. 177; and Buckingham, 1850 p. 215. Tapley p. 5 and Thomas p. 177 are indeed used in the article, but are used to cite the first part of the hook, that it was indeed founded in 1768, but not the latter part "used as a voice against British rule just before the American Revolution", at least explicitly.Buckingham p. 215 was not used at all in the article. The article goes on it indeed being used for anti-British sentiment, but it didn't cite any of the three references stated in this nomination I suppose rewording this part of the hook in the first part of the history section works.
    Other:
    • QPQ:  Done
    • Image: Green tickY Is free, used in the article and surprisingly looks good at thumbnail size.
    I can sympathize with letting the reader understand that this was indeed a voice against the British in the exposition, but for DYK purposes it has to explicitly stated. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:09, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: — Howard, thanks for your prompt and thorough review. Yes, Buckingham, p. '215', was a mistake, evidently a typo on my part, not even noted in the Citations section. The statement that supports the idea of "voice against British rule" is on p. 217. : "It (The Gazette) was well conducted, and ably supported the cause of the people against the unjust measures of the British Parliament." I edited the template to this effect. This should solve the discrepancy. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:37, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, it being against the British was stated in the article, cited by ref #8, citing Buckingham, p. 216. Please use the exact same reference as used in the article itself, with mostly the same thought for the hook. This should be good to go. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:01, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Fixed — My mistake again. I had thought the wrong page number only occurred in the template. Will double check the rest of the article. Thanks again. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:12, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]