Talk:Port of Spain Gazette

Did you know nomination

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 SL93 (talk) 03:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Port of Spain Gazette was known for its strongly pro-slavery position in the 1830s and it was said that it "spat its venom on anyone who spoke of the virtues of emancipation"? Source: "The Port of Spain Gazette which Hodgson calls "the vilest [journal] that ever disgraced the press of any country" (Truths p. 198), acted on behalf of the planters and generally spat its venom on anyone who spoke of the virtues of emancipation" (Cudjoe, Selwyn R. (2003). Beyond boundaries: the intellectual tradition of Trinidad and Tobago in the nineteenth century. Wellesley, Mass.: Calaloux Publications. ISBN 1-55849-318-2)

• Reviewed: Boophis entingae

Moved to mainspace by Guettarda (talk). Self-nominated at 00:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Verified Hook with this snippet match. The link to 'emancipation' in the hook feels somewhat easter-eggy to me, but no big concerns either way. Nice work! Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 02:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Eddie891. I was a bit worried about that. I'll remove the link. Guettarda (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Port of Spain Gazette/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Willbb234 (talk · contribs) 22:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi there. I'll be reviewing this article for GA status. If you have any questions, please let me know. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 22:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

• The first, most obvious point is that the article is a bit fragmented. I recommend merging the final three paragraphs of the 'History' section and the final two of the 'Editorial stance' section. Done
• You should mention it was named after/based in Port of Spain, especially seeing as it's in the infobox. Done
• Wikilink to Proslavery, Slavery or another appropriate page. Done
• Wikilink to Roman Catholicism. Done
• Wikilink to Creole peoples. Done
  • It actually means a certain subset of white Trinidadians, which badly needs either an article or a section in White Trinidadian and Tobagonian. Linked to that article for now. Guettarda (talk) 16:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• withdrew support for the newspaper was this financial support? If so, you should clarify this.
  • Just "support" in the sense of running afoul of a ruler with near-absolute power. Guettarda (talk) 00:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• government contract the publisher comma between "contract" and "publisher". Done
• as a successor to the Trinidad Gazette this just repeats what was said in the previous section.
  • Trimmed. Guettarda (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• after a backlash triggered by the publication of his novel Warner Arundell: The Adventures of a Creole upset the paper's subscribers commas after "backlash" and "Creole". Also, why was there a backlash?
  • Reworded, and explained. Guettarda (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• whose son, A. P. T. Ambard, served as editor.[2]:55 In 1944 A. P. T. Ambard sold... you never mention that A. P. T. Ambard was in possession of the paper, only that his father was. The assumption is that he inherited the paper, but you should clarify this.
  • I know, but I haven't been able to find a source that discusses this. Guettarda (talk) 00:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• was among the papers see WP:WEASEL. You should be more specific here. It also assumes the reader knows what papers you are referring to.
  • I can't be more specific - the source only said "the Gazette and three other newspapers". So I trimmed the reference to other papers. Guettarda (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• The purchasers in 1955 were reported by the Gleaner to be connected to the Democratic Labour Party and wanted to prevent the paper's closure because they reportedly felt that as capital of the West Indies Federation, Port of Spain should have more than one daily newspaper.[14] Despite this attempt to revive its fortunes, the paper went out of business in 1959 amid continued losses. this isn't really on the 'Editorial stance' of the paper. I recommend moving to the 'History' section.
  • Yes, definitely. Guettarda (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• newsprint, especially newspaper comma after "newspaper".
  • Clarify what I intended there. Guettarda (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Please let m know when you have responded to these comments. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 22:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the review Willbb234. I think I've addressed all everything. Guettarda (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I'll promote this to GA. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 11:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)