Talk:Berliner Journal

Sic

I found a hilarious 1915 letter to the editor in the course of my research:

We dont want Kiser Williams paper in canada we want King George papers we dont want Kiser too rool in Ontario we have inglish paper too find out whats going on. You better get out too Germany there you can print what you like.

I'm wondering about how to utilize Sic here, given that it becomes difficult to read when they are added after every mistake.

We dont [sic] want Kiser Williams [sic] paper in canada [sic] we want King George papers we dont [sic] want Kiser [sic] too [sic] rool [sic] in Ontario we have inglish [sic] paper [sic] too [sic] find out whats [sic] going on. You better get out too [sic] Germany there you can print what you like.

Thoughts? Tkbrett (✉) 00:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps a note saying "printed as in original". What an interesting little artifact of that time. Julius177 (talk) 01:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

The closure of the Ontario Journal

In my research, I have run into discrepancies among sources about when the Ontario Journal closed. I figured I would summarize them here in the hopes that a grad student studying this newspaper in a decade digs a little deeper and can clarify what happened.

Source	Direct quotation	Ref
Anon. for the Waterloo Historical Society (1959)	"In 1917 the name was changed to The Ontario Journal and in October, 1918, it was printed in English. In 1919 the Journal joined forces with the Record and gave up its separate publishing office on Queen Street South."
Herbert Karl Kalbfleisch (1968)	"[O]n October 2, 1918 ... an Order-in-Council issued by the cabinet of the government of Canada [prohibited] newspapers in the German language in Canada. The Journal was obliged to abide by this decree ..."
Gottlieb Leibbrandt (1980)	"... [A]n order-of-council on October 2, 1918, put an end to all Canadian papers in the German language and the Journal ceased publication."
John English and Kenneth McLaughlin (1983)	"The German press in Kitchener died in 1918 when the Journal was forced to close by an order-in-council which banned publications in the German language."
Heinz Lehmann (1986)	"When it was prohibited in 1918 it reappeared transformed into the English-language Ontario Journal."
Patricia P. McKegney (1991)	"... the end of the German-language newspaper, the Ontario Journal (Oct. 2, 1918) by a Federal Order-in-Council".
Anne Lötche (2008)	"In 1908, the Journal had more than five thousand subscribers. Ten years later, when it ceased publication, it had just thirty-two hundred. ... In the last German-language issue of 2 October [1918] the editors were still optimistic that they could continue publication in German even though there were rumours of a ban."
Barbara Lorenzkowski (2010)	On 9 October 1918, the Berliner Journal appeared under a new name – The Ontario Journal – and, in compliance with an Order-in-Council by the Union Government, was published in English." Endnote: "Ontario Journal, 9 October 1918. See also the editorial "Past and Future," Ontario Journal, 25 December 1918."
Kitchener Public Library	"Editions held in collection: ... Ontario Journal (formerly Berliner Journal) – German – 10 Jan 1917 - Dec 1918"
WorldCat	"Title varies: Jan. 10, 1917-May 10, 1924 as Ontario Journal."
Waterloo Region Record	"John Motz and Friedrich Rittinger published the first issue of a German weekly, The Berliner Journal, on Dec. 29, 1859. The Journal would continue for the next 65 years". (1859 + 65 = 1924)

References

I went to the Kitchener Public Library and found the microfilm of the 25 December 1918 Ontario Journal piece "Past and Future". Here are some excerpts:

We had about twelve hours time to get out the first English issue of the Journal. But we got it out. And – we are still on the job. New readers are pouring in at such a rate that the Journal will stay on the job and will without doubt become bigger, better and more influential than ever. If any individual or any newspaper ever thought that the prohibition of the German language would put the Ontario Journal out of existence, well – it's up to that individual or that newspaper to think again! ... The Ontario Journal, by the change of language, in some respects has become a new newspaper. ... Possibly, the experience of the Ontario Journal in 1918 is the beginning of greater things, and thus the present loss may prove to be a blessing in disguise. ...

Here's what I make of everything: an Order in Council passed on 25 September 1918 prohibiting the publication of newspapers in German. The last German-language issue of the Ontario Journal came out on 2 October, running its first English-only issue a week later on 9 October. The News Record acquired the Journal, or W. J. Motz and W. D. Euler bought the News Record, in late 1918 or early 1919. The Journal continued to be published under that name until 1924, though the content of the two papers was identical.

I haven't been able to find any source laying this out clearly, but have pieced it together as best I can. I can't put this in the article because it would swerve into original research, but I hope that this can help clarify things for any confused PhD candidate. Tkbrett (✉) 19:03, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Berliner Journal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 16:25, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi! I'm opening a Good Article Nomination review. Hoping to complete the review over the next couple of days. I'll be using the template below. Thanks! Ganesha811 (talk) 16:25, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

• This passes GA review! I'll do the needful now to complete the review. Congrats to Tkbrett and everyone else who worked on the article. Ganesha811 (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks Ganesha811. I very much appreciate your thoroughness as I'm hoping to eventually nominate this one to be an FA. Tkbrett (✉) 14:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

    Tkbrett, no problem, it's a very interesting article! I also read the Berlin-to-Kitchener name change one with fascination. I've learned a little in the past about anti-German sentiment in the US, but knew nothing about similar issues in Canada. Ganesha811 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is very good, just one thing: where the "editors explained that being born and raised in...", explained where? In an editorial? At a public meeting? Lochte says the editors published an article, which sounds like an editorial to me, but I'll use the word article to stick with her phrasing: ...the editors explained that being... -> ...the editors explained in a September 1914 article that being... Excellent, thanks for the fix. Pass on prose.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass, no issues here.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	No uncited passages, references are densely but clearly laid out. Pass.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	A couple questions: The three theses (Coschi, Richardson, and Robinson) - were any of them published or otherwise peer-reviewed? WP:SCHOLARSHIP says that theses should be used with care, especially if we cannot confirm that they were peer-reviewed. WP:SCHOLARSHIP mentions "[i]f possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature": Coschi has been cited in a peer-reviewed paper. Robinson is cited in the endnotes of the book Being German Canadian: History, Memory, Generations (Univ. of Manitoba Press, 2021, p. 52n19), appended to a sentence reading: "Many other studies have yet to be published, including several excellent dissertations and master's theses". WP:SCHOLARSHIP also mentions "Masters dissertations ... are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence". In the case of Richardson, I believe this is the case. Historian Gregory Hayes refers to her thesis in the endnotes to his book Waterloo County: An Illustrated History (Waterloo Historical Society, 1997, p. 261n24), as do historians Agata Monkiewicz and James M. Skidmore in their Berliner Journal chapter for Germany and the Americas: Culture, Politics, and History (ABC-CLIO, 2005, p. 138). Richardson also wrote John Motz's entry for the Dictionary of Canadian Biography (University of Toronto/Université Laval, 1998), citing her thesis in the process. Thank you for your detailed answer - all three sources should be good, then. I'm not sure that cite #126 is necessary (see original research note below). I've gone ahead and removed it. Are there ISBNs or other identifiers for the Lloyd George and Boeschenstein books? I fleshed out the Boeschenstein reference. Lloyd George was published before the existence of ISBNs, so I've added an OCLC instead. Pass on sourcing.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Note 1 seems to be skirting the line for original research. The Lochte source is fine, but I don't think we need the "absence of evidence is evidence" bits. I've removed the Kitchener Public Library reference. I believe ref 125 is important because it indicates the various contradictions among sources; most of them say the paper stopped publishing in October 1918, while others provide evidence that it still existed in December 1918. I've tried to avoid OR by not making any definite conclusions, but by simply laying out what all of the sources say. Fair enough - thanks for making the modification! Checking the rest of the article for OR. Pass, no further issues.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvio finds nothing of concern, hold for manual spot-check. Spot check (not 100% comprehensive) found nothing of concern. Pass.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Pass, no other major areas turned up via searching / checking sources.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass. I was a little concerned since it's a long article on a historically small newspaper, but the article's quality means it avoids trivial detail.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Pass, no issues found.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Ongoing changes and editing by Tkbrett, but no edit warring - largely stable. Would be good to hold off on further expansion during the review except in response to review questions/issues. I made some changes I wanted to get to before your review started, so that it should be it. I'll hold off from here. Thanks. Tkbrett (✉) 14:40, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Pass, no issues here.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Pass, no issues here. I will possibly find some spots to add images as I do prose review, but shouldn't be a big deal.
	7. Overall assessment.