Talk:George B. Crittenden

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
Please feel free to leave comments.
After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes.

George B. Crittenden has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 30, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Biography / North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

United States: Kentucky Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Low-importance).

Why cashiered?

What was he cashiered for in 1848? Valetude (talk) 13:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drinking. I've added this information to the article. Hog Farm _Talk 05:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Nominator: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 16:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 12:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at this one. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

A couple of p/pp errors.
- I've fixed two - I think this is all of them? Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Friend, the ISSN is 0038-478X and the OCLC is 9972975822.
- Thanks, added. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The map: the original source should be under "Source", not "Description".
- That stuff isn't actually the source of this - the editor who created this is a professional Civil War cartographer who has had his maps printed in some reliable scholarly sources and donated a bunch of maps to Wikipedia. I don't know for sure what sources Hal Jespersen used, but the stuff in the description was added by another editor for verifiability reasons. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe add a standard map to locate the activity within the eastern/south-eastern US?
- I've added a location map to show some of the more important locations. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two images are missing alt text.
- Added, although I struggled with this a bit for the theater map
Both images seem small, the map unreadably so.
- I've scaled them up - is this better? Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Texian", really? I thought the possessive was either Texican or Texan.
- See Texians - this is a term specifically used to refer to the Republic of Texas settlers/soldiers. Modern residents of Texas are "Texans", though - Texian is not used for the post-annexation period. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"His father used his influence to push for his release, and upon returning to Kentucky resumed the practice of law." It is unclear who resumed the practise of law.
- Clarified
"He had been arrested for drunkenness once". Suggest either deleting "once" or using 'on one occasion'.
- Deleted once. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"it was too late to move the troops back across the river." And so?
- I've tried rephrasing this - is this better? Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"in a backwater region". Suggest also naming it.
- Named. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"a departmental command." Which would be what?
- Added. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this about the level you want? If the GAN coordinators look in on this they will think I have gone mad. More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:21, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is very helpful. I'm hoping to take this directly to FAC in mid-February, bypassing ACR entirely as that process tends to take several months now. Hog Farm _Talk 03:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"his father was John J. Crittenden,[2] who was an influential politician, governor of Kentucky in the late 1840s and early 1850s, was the United States Attorney General in the administrations of Presidents William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor, and a United States Senator." "was the" in the middle of this reads oddly.
- Removed. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The younger Crittenden". Which one would that be?
- Clarified. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Several bits are not in chronological order. Eg being told his father secured his appointment after he graduated.
- I've re-arranged this; I'll look for other instances. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Bachelor of Laws". Upper-case initial letters?
- The article on this subject treats this is a proper noun. This capitalization is also found off-wiki, see for instance Harvard. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"he started a law practice that same year." 1833?
- Rephrased. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"the prisoners were blindfolded while drawing the beans, along with Crittenden's previous transfer to the hospital." Is the last clause in the wrong place?
- I've rephrased this. Hog Farm _Talk 02:08, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"and after traveling to Washington, D.C. to plead with the United States Secretary of War after tendering a resignation." "after" twice and events not in chronological order.
- And also a sentence fragment. Have moved things around to fix both issues. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Having been restored for duty". Should "for" be 'to'?
- Yes, fixed. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"A full promotion followed on March 15, 1848, but this was followed by another arrest for drunkenness. Following a court martial". "... followed ... followed ... Following ..."
- Wording varied. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"the Territorial Governor of New Mexico". Why the upper-case T and C?
- Now in lowercase. Hog Farm _Talk 03:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General: the article IMO has too much detail in places. I can just about live with this at GAN, but would take a lot of convincing at FAC. Eg, IMO all the stuff on the Crittenden Compromise should go; the bean anecdote has too much detail (especially for something which almost certainly didn't happen)

I've trimmed down the bean bit; I think the story about him drawing the beans twice needs to be included - it made it into the American National Biography, Eubank, and several other sources. I agree with Pritchard that this is probably wrong and I think its significant that the TSHA source makes no mention of this at all. But this has become enough of a folkloric accretion to the historic memory of Crittenden that I think it needs to be mentioned. The Crittenden Compromise has been cut down to one sentence stating that it happened and was rejected; I think it's likewise significant to note that while George was going south and Thomas going north, their notable father was trying to stave off war. Beyond the beans and the (possibly inebriated) Mill Springs disaster, the whole Brother against brother nature of how the Crittenden family split - major general north, major general south, father trying to stave off the war - is what Crittenden is known for, at least in the United States. Hog Farm _Talk 02:08, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't suggest that you remove the bean anecdote, just that it had "too much detail". Similarly if keeping a clear mention of father trying to stave off the war is in your opinion important, fine; but did it really need that level of detail. Feel free to expand "but the compromise was not approved." a bit. War drawing closer, Crittenden Sr desperately hawking his plan around, the last best hope of avoiding war - build a bit of dramatic tension. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"stemmed from the death of his mother during his adolescence, and from pressure from his father". "... from ... from ... from ..."
- Resolved via trimming Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"On November 9, Crittenden was promoted to major general and was assigned to command the Eastern District of Kentucky." Then two sentences on other things, then back to "Davis appointed Crittenden, expecting that the Kentuckian would be popular with the residents of his home state and wanting a more experienced officer than Zollicoffer in command."
- I've re-arranged some things around for a better topical arrangement. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"but not to exercise command in east Tennessee except explicitly ordered to do so by Johnston", There is a word missing after "except", but suggest replacing "except" with 'unless'.
- Should have been "unless". Changed. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"clawed"! Encyclopedic?
- Rephrased. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The battle was a Confederate defeat, and Crittenden's men fled from the field." maybe reverse these two clauses? Depending on which you consider cause and which effect.
- I think this is fine as it is - the retreat from the field is where things really snowballed out of control. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Further charges of treason and "constant inebriation" spread." Maybe a synonym for "charges which (to me) implies formal proceedings.
- I've replaced with "allegations" Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The deceased Zollicoffer was not blamed for the defeat". It may be a BritEng/me thing, but "deceased" sounds euphemistic. 'dead'?
- I think this works fine in AmEng. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Link "corps".
- Done Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe link "staff officer"?
- Linked Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"it did contain strategic salt works and lead mines". "strategic" is IMO an overworked word. Perhaps 'important'?
- Change made Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Union Major General Ambrose Burnside moved into the region. In September, he led a small force in a series of delaying actions". Perhaps name "he"?
- Named Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The next day, Crittenden was reassigned to be the regional inspector general." That would be on September 5, yes?
- Clarified. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Crittenden spent much of the rest of the war performing administrative tasks". Does "much" mean 'all'?
- Apparently, yes. Rephrased. Hog Farm _Talk 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Crittenden surrendered along with Johnston's army". Perhaps mention when?
- After comparing Pritchard 2010 against Pritchard 2008, this has been tweaked a bit. Hog Farm _Talk 02:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"was indicted for treason". Perhaps mention by whom, given that he spent much of his career being charged with a range of misdemeanours by a variety of bodies.
- This was in the federal court system, which I've noted. Hog Farm _Talk 02:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"He died at the home of a sister". Is the name of the sister known?
- Added. Hog Farm _Talk 02:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"His brother Thomas had been a Union major general during the war." Maybe 'His brother Thomas had served in the Union during the war, rising to the rank of major general'?
- More replies. Hog Farm _Talk 02:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And that's your lot. The roughest GAN review I have ever done. Obviously I would be happy to promote to GA without most of what is mentioned above, which was written with an imminent FAC in mind. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- I reckon this wasn't in as good of shape as I thought it was, but thank you for bearing with it. Hog Farm _Talk 02:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The roughest GAN review" may have been ambiguous. I meant that I have never given a GAN nominator such a rough time. Any hoo, it looks good now. Rereading, the Mill Springs thing could maybe tightened up a bit, but we can discuss that at FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks on sourcing are fine. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]