Wikipedia:Peer review/Joseph B. Foraker/archive1

Joseph B. Foraker

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
. I've listed this article for peer review because… I'm planning to take it to FAC as part of my endless series on the Gilded Age.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: First instalment, more to follow:

Lead

I have a problem with the opening sentence, which I found awkwardly phrased ("from Ohio from", etc). I've had a go at smoothing it, and have come up with: Joseph Benson Foraker (July 5, 1846 – May 10, 1917) was a Republican politician who was the 37th Governor of Ohio from 1886 to 1890, and served as Ohio's United States Senator from 1897 to 1909." Apart from anything else, that gives the proper chronology.
I also found this sentence difficult: "Foraker lost re-election in 1889, and ran for Senate in 1892, losing then, but was elected by the Ohio Legislature in 1896." My attempt: "Foraker lost re-election in 1889, but was elected to the United States Senate by the Ohio Legislature in 1896, after an unsuccessful Senate bid in 1892".
I suggest the sentence beginning "Foraker came to differ with President Theodore Roosevelt..." be split
The words in the last paragraph "and the senator left office in 1909" are redundant, as Foraker's term of service has already been stated.

Boyhood and Civil War

Is "a typical Ohio farm boy" different from a typical farm boy elsewhere?
In the next sentence "He received little formal education as a boy..." - the words "as a boy" are unnecessary in the context of the sentence
What is the nature of the office of "auditor" of Highland County?

Neither the memoirs nor Walters' biography is specific, but there is mention of making up the tax duplicates for the county treasurer. The name "auditor" implies that he made sure the books balanced.

"Joseph Foraker was a replacement for his older brother, Burch..." In what role was he a replacement for his brother? From what you say later it appears he filled a clerical post in his uncle's office, but this needs to be made more explicit.
"Foraker had as yet seen little actual fighting..." - prior to the relief of Fort Donelson, I take it. Perhaps, to make this clear: "Before this action, Foraker had seen little fighting..."
Do you mean "promoted to second lieutenant" or "commissioned as second lieutenant"? In the British army, the second would apply.

Foraker makes it clear in his memoirs that his promotion was to fill the place of an officer who had been promoted himself. I understand the distinction between commissioned rank and others, but in these state-organized regiments of the Civil War period, things were a bit looser, I gather.

The term "brevet" requires a link. Also perhaps aide de camp for the non-military among us.

Education and early career

"...graduated as part of Cornell's inaugural class, consisting of eight students." Suggest "...which consisted of"
I wonder if it might be thought overdetailing to mention the obviously brief and inconsequential partnership with Cole? (This is after all a long article.)
For what office was he supporting Alphonso Taft? This might be obvious to American readers but not, alas, to us foreigners.
"Foraker began to run for elective office as a Republican himself." Unnecessary intro; the rest of the paragraph gives all the necessary details
Any information on the nature of the illness that forced Foraker's resignation from his judgeship?

Foraker describes it as a temporary illness that gave him and his friends serious concern, and says it cleared up after some months of "rest and recreation". Walters says the same thing but for variations in language. I'm suspicious the illness may not have been purely physical.

Brianboulton (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Up to date.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Next lot

Seeking the governorship (1883–1885)

Can we avoid "sought" repetition in first two lines?
Just a suggestion: "He had offended German-Americans over the issue, who were deemed likely to vote Democratic..." does not read smoothly. Perhaps: "His stand on this issue had offended German-Americans, who were deemed likely to vote Democratic..."
"though ill part of the campaign with malaria" needs comma after "malaria", and probably "for" before "part"
"to play an active role in Sherman's campaign" → "to play an active role in Sherman's presidential campaign". I would emphasise this a little later by saying: "Other candidates for the presidential nomination..."
It might be worth having a footnote to explain why President Arthur was a mere candidate—and unsuccessful—for his party's nomination. Just a brief note indicating how he came to be president, perhaps.

Policies as governor

"including the Poorman Law, requiring voter registration..." Better, I think, would be: "including the Poorman Law which required voter registration..."
The quote beginning ""I had a call from Major McKinley..." should be more specifically linked to Hanna.
Some confusion needs to be resolved around the question of the appointment of oil inspector and the appointment of deputies. What was the nature of McKinley's approach to Foraker after his re-election in 1887, and was George B. Cox apointed inspector or deputy? It might also be worth saying why the oil inspector appointment carried such esteem; were the fees large, were there perks etc? Did deputies get paid? Above all, what did oil inspectors or deputies actually do?

This gives a description. I gather from references that he did his work at refineries, and became less relevant as local refineries became rarer in favor of interstate pipelines which due to wide distribution are more likely to be of a given quality, or at least easier to check. I'm content to have the reader regard it as an archaic office sought after without the need for lengthy explanation.

1888 convention; defeat for third term

"deciding to push for Sherman's endorsement" → "and decided to push for Sherman's endorsement" (they decided at the meeting, rather than " met deciding")
Sometimes in the text it's not always clear who is meant by appellations such as "the congressman", "the governor". I got a bit confused in the first paragraph, and sometimes elsewhere.
"He felt relieved at the break..." Need to identify "he"
"Despite the factional opposition, Foraker sought a third term in 1889, hoping to be elected to the Senate as Sherman's junior colleague in the legislative election to be held in January 1890". It needs to be clearer that Foraker sought a third term as governor, hoping that at the end of which he would be elected to the Senate, and that his renomination in 1889 was for the governorship

Return to the law; first run for senator

"Hanna had made significant campaign contributions to legislative candidate" - should that be "candidates" (plural)?
Superfluous "instead" (third para, after "Sherman"

Election to the Senate; involvement in presidential race

Have we previously clarified, in this article, that at the time, US Senators were elected by legislatures rather than the popular vote? If not, we should do so here.

Will conclude later (today or tomorrow) Brianboulton (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I shall work through these also today or tomorrow. I will make it clearer why the oil inspectorship was prized, although the ability to hire deputies was part of it. But it did pay substantial cash, and paid by the oil companies, not the taxpayer.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the rest

Rivalry with Hanna

"Bushnell (who would get to appoint a temporary replacement) and Foraker did not want to appoint Hanna..." This reads as though Foraker had a role in the appointment of the replacement. Surely, only Bushnell could appoint?
"...and the governor offered the seat..." For proper prose continuity, "and" should read "at which point", or something similar.
Dates: Bushnell announces Hanna's appointment on 21 February; Foraker is sworn in on 4 March. Yet: "Hanna adherents claimed that Bushnell had delayed the appointment of the industrialist until after Foraker took his seat..." That doesn't seem to tally with the dates as given. I understand, from reading on, that Hanna's appointment was not effective until Sherman resigned on 5 March, but that's a different matter from Bushnell's delaying the appointment.

I guess the idea was that they should have gotten Sherman to resign before March 4. I don't see that as likely. Sherman was not so far gone as to resign from the Senate without his next job assured, given that he knew there was substance to the rumors about him. McKinley could have withdrawn the nomination, or pressure could have been put on Sherman to avoid an embarrassing confirmation debate in the Senate. For some reason, I gather this fairly poor attack has stuck into history books, but as it has I have to cover it. I will attempt to clarify.

"With McKinley in the Executive Mansion (as the White House was still formally known) and Sherman expected to be senior senator, Foraker had known that he could expect limited patronage appointments for his supporters;" I'm not sure how to read this part of the sentence; is the sense "only limited patronage" (i.e a negative sense) or "a certain amount of patronage" (a more positive sense?
"...with Hanna instead in the Senate, Foraker was not excluded from appointments, but Hanna was able to exercise a veto over his candidates." Is the word "making" (or similar) missing before "appointments"? Also, it is not explained why Hanna had the power to exercise this veto.
The final sentence of this short paragraph jumps to a different topic and might be better placed in the next paragraph.
"This helped assure support..." I think "ensure"
"Roosevelt replied that his administration's supporters would vote for such a resolution..." Roosevelt could not state this as fact, only as expectation. He expected his administration's supporters to vote for the resolution.
Is "devolved" the right term to describe Dick's succession to Hanna's Senate seat?

I've changed it, but it can mean "inherit". Dick was close to Hanna.

War and territorial gain

"calling for supporting" is inelegant; why not just "supporting"?
It would be of help to the reader to know the gist of McKinley's "war message"
"...war quickly followed. Foraker followed..." Avoidable repetition
"US keeping Spanish colonies" → "US acquiring Spanish colonies"?
Unrequired comma after "passage of the legislation" - otherwise the sentence's meaning is lost
It "granted" the Puerto Ricans an American-appointed governor - I would have thought "imposed on" would be more appropriate, likewise in regard to the largely American-appointed legislature. A grant is a favour.

Opposition to Roosevelt/Brownsville case

" the power to set rates" - What rates are these?
Perhaps make it clearer that the "admisinstration-favoured bill" became the "Hepburn Act"
I had to use the link to find out what the Gridiron dinner was, and search hrough that article. It would save time if readers were given a few words of explanation in this article.
I imagine that "coon" was not considered (at least by white people) as a derogatory racial epithet in 1908, so although by today's standards inconceivable outside the KKK, the "All coons look alike to me" comment was probably not thought especially offensive then. Perhaps this should be clarified

It was certainly negative. I would have a hard time imagining them placing that in a programme book to be given to the present president.! I've linked to Wiktionary, much as I did for "colossal" in the Statue of Liberty article. The reader will know it is offensive, and that it was printed at a time when racial sensitivities were less than they are today. I would hesitate to say it was unacceptable then. It was acceptable among too many. I'd rather not dignify it with a footnote although I suppose I can if called upon. I knew this would be a touchy point but saw no alternatives. And a picture is certainly worth a thousand words.

"even though even though" - duplication

1908 race; defeat for re-election

"...left for after victory was gained" → "left until victory was obtained"
"Taft spoke in appreciation of Foraker for appointing him, twenty years previously, to the bench" - clarify that this was while Foraker was state governor, and also be a bit more explicit about the nature of the appointment.
"Foraker sent a letter by the hand of Senator Dick to Taft" - faintly old-fashioned phrasing.

Final years and death

Presumably Harding's 1910 gubanatorial bid was unsuccessful?
"Although Harding did not attack Foraker, his supporters, including Cleveland publisher Dan R. Hanna (son of the late senator), had no such scruples, and Harding was victorious in the primary with 88,540 votes to 76,817 for Foraker and 52,237 for Cole, and subsequently, the general election." Too much information foe one sentence. My suggestion: "Although Harding did not attack Foraker, his supporters, including Cleveland publisher Dan R. Hanna (son of the late senator), had no such scruples. Harding was victorious in the primary with 88,540 votes to 76,817 for Foraker and 52,237 for Cole, and subsequently won the general election."
Did Foraker take up Roosevelt's invitation to visit him?

No, it was less than a year before Foraker died, and he did not go east again before his death.

Assessment

Some citation issues:

You refer to Nevins' biography of Foraker, yet the book is not listed as a source. Thee quotations from the book are cited to a different book

Nevins wrote the foreword to Walters' book, but he was a reputable historian in his own right.

What was Murat Halstead editor of? And again, his opinion is cited to Walters.

Yes, it's quoted in Walters. The Cincinnati Commercial Tribune.

Gould quotation cited to Weaver

Yes, the quote is in another work.

I believe that when a source is being quoted verbatim from another work, the convention is to recognise this in the citation, e.g. "Gould, quoted in Weaver, p. xxi". That way, you are covered if the cited source misquotes or distorts the original. Brianboulton (talk) 12:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's it from me. As with previous articles, an informative and engrossing account of old politics, starring someone who was a complete stranger to me before I began reading your articles. Now I seem to know him well, and feel almost a sense of warmth towards the old boy. I've not had time to look at images, but I'm sure you'll check these out before the FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 22:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. These have been taken care of or annotated why not. I'm glad you liked the old boy, he grew on me as well. Something more than a Gilded Age corporation senator. Maybe he had the vision to be president, given the opportunity ...--Wehwalt (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]