Wikipedia:Peer review/Elias Abraham Rosenberg/archive1

Elias Abraham Rosenberg

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has passed Good Article and I'd like to try to improve it further if I can. It's a fairly short article and there isn't much in the way of available source material that I can find, so I'm not sure if Featured Article status is attainable. I might like to give it a shot though, so a general peer review would be appreciated.

Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 23:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments by Sarastro

This looks pretty good overall. I don't think the length of the article or the paucity of source material would stand in the way of FA status if the article is comprehensive.

• "In the mid-1880s, Rosenberg traveled to Hawaii and become popular with locals, leading to his introduction to King Kalākaua by 1886. He claimed to be a fortune teller and began making predictions about the king's future.": Did he become popular as a fortune teller or was this role claimed after he met the king? I think this should be made clearer.
  • Rephrased, hope that it's clearer.
• "By the fall of 1886, Rosenberg had left San Francisco for the Hawaii": It may be better to be more precise in dating this, per WP:SEASON. Also, should it be "for the Hawaii"?
  • It's a bit tricky for me to figure out how to write this, it's unknown when he arrived, but it is definitely know that he was there by November '86. Fixed "the".
• Do we know where the Torah and yad came from?
  • No, I think that's a mystery, there's nothing in the sources about that.
• ""At that time, Rosenberg had a long white beard and a charming and witty personality": Need to say who thought so to avoid editorial voice.
  • Done.
• "At that time, Rosenberg had a long white beard and a charming and witty personality. He casted optimistic horoscopes for anyone who wanted one, using his Torah and yad." It is not quite clear which references support these statements and I could not tell from a quick check. Also, how did he use the Torah and yad to cast a horoscope?
  • Good question, I removed part of that bit.
• "By November 1886, King Kalākaua trusted Rosenberg's skill as a fortune teller": A few points. First, as above, the dating could be more precise. When did he first meet the king? Second, the sentence kind of implies that he did not trust Rosenberg before this, which may or may not be true. Third, is there anything that can explain what made the king trust him?
  • Ok, I took a stab at rephrasing/clarifying all that.
• "…and two months later, he granted Rosenberg a private audience at ʻIolani Palace": Where and how did they meet prior to this?
  • Looked at the source again, clarified.
• "Lorrin A. Thurston recalled that after Rosenberg became close with the King, Rosenberg routinely visited for several consecutive days at a time and the pair held long conversations." A little uncomfortable as it stands. Suggest "After becoming close to the king, Rosenberg routinely visited him for several consecutive days… according to Lorrin A Thurston."
  • Done.
• "This claim encouraged the king as he was seeking to restore aspects of Hawaiian religion and he established a society dedicated to the cause." May be smoother to say "This claim encouraged the king, who sought to restore aspects of Hawaiian religion and had established a society dedicated to this cause."
  • Done
• "leading to the 1887 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii (known as the Bayonet Constitution)" It may help the reader here to briefly explain how this constitution impacted on the king. It is mentioned later but could be better if it was explained at this point. And could it be dated more precisely to show how it fits into Rosenberg's chronology?
  • Ok, tried to spell out more detail.
• The start of the paragraph beginning "In late January" about his customs job could perhaps be smoothed a little by merging one or two of the sentences to make it less choppy. Not a huge issue, though. Also, there is perhaps too much repetition of "customs" and "customs office".
• Changed one.
• "The gossip columnist of the Hawaiian Gazette alleged that though Rosenberg did no work at the customs office, he collected a regular salary nonetheless": Possibly remove some redundancy: "The gossip columnist of the Hawaiian Gazette alleged that though Rosenberg did no work at the customs office, [but still] he collected a regular salary nonetheless."
  • Done
• ""His Majesty Kalākaua I to Abraham Rosenberg" was inscribed on the cup and one side of the medal.": Fussy, but for precision it may be better to say "The cup and [one side of the] medal were inscribed with the words "His Majesty Kalākaua I to Abraham Rosenberg"."
  • Done.
• "The reverse side of the medal featured a profile of the king and there was a gold crown on the side that attached to a blue ribbon." A little unclear. What has the blue ribbon to do with it? I read this as "there was a gold crown on the side that didn't have the profile of the king on it". In this case, this should be put before it says "reverse side" or it looks like the medal had three sides.
  • Tried to clarify the details there.
• "The king's decision to give him lavish gifts also was criticized in The Hawaiian Gazette." Also is unnecessary as no other criticism is recorded. If you want to avoid a short sentence, perhaps add it to "On June 1, Rosenberg received a gold medal and a silver cup from the king": "On June 1, Rosenberg received a gold medal and a silver cup from the king, a decision criticised in The Hawaiian Gazette".
  • Done
• "Perhaps foreseeing the future…": Not in the source and reads like editorial opinion.
  • Removed.
• Is his cause of death known?
  • No, I don't believe any of the sources contain a cause of death. They do note that he hobbled late in life though.
• How was the Torah lost and recovered? Although not strictly relevant, it would be interesting to have the information here.
  • Found a source, added to article.
• Are there any "judgements" of him, either contemporary or "scholarly". For example, the "Rogues, Rascals and Villains" article paints him as a fraud. Are there other views which agree or disagree?
  • Added a few, but there isn't much there.
• I have not performed any spot checks on sources.
• I cannot comment on the comprehensiveness or source quality of the article. However, most obvious questions seem to be answered, such as a Jewish presence on Hawaii before Rosenberg. Possibly a little more on religion(s) there at the time, or a little more background on the king (although again, most relevant questions seem to be answered). So, with the strong qualification that I am far from an expert and know nothing of the people or period, it looks comprehensive enough for me.
  • Thanks, I mentioned a bit more about religions then.
• Similarly, I do not know if all the relevant sources and authorities are included but there is nothing that indicates any problems.
• I'm not sure about the lead image of the yad. It comes from a 1970 article and therefore would not be PD as far as I can see. The licence is almost certainly wrong.
  • Thanks for pointing that out, I've nominated it for deletion at Commons.
• Although not essential, some other images may help the article, of either people or places mentioned, if available.
  • Added a couple.

I do not usually watch peer reviews, so please let me know of any problems or questions on my talk page. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

• Excellent feedback, some of these will be easier than others, but I think review this will improve the article a lot. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Brief further comments

• "Opinions of Rosenberg have been mixed, some see him as a charlatan, but he has also been characterized as a good-natured mystic and is commemorated with a display in a Hawaiian Jewish temple": I'm not sure the main body backs up these opinions of him.
• Watch out for repetition of "king" in last paragraph of the lead. Also, consecutive sentences begin "The king".
• I think "remained in the possession" is better than "remained with...".
• "After they became close, they routinely visited for several consecutive days at a time..." The last sentence was only about the king; I would suggest a slight rephrase, not least to avoid repetition of "they": "After becoming close, the king and Rosenberg routinely visited each other for ..."
• Fourth paragraph of Hawaii: Too many sentences beginning with "In [date]...": needs some more variety.

I have only had a quick look, but nothing else jumped out. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:04, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

• • Done, thanks. I think this has been a very productive peer review. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)