Jump to content

Talk:John Dawson (slave trader)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Desertarun (talk | contribs) at 08:28, 21 September 2024 (Requested move 20 September 2024). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Book sources are good but if you can, please do add more easy to verify online sources. Thanks for creating!.

Celestina007 (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

James Dawson - John Dawson confusion

Liverpool National Museums accession SAS/25A/1/9 Papers re Baker and Dawson family, shipbuilders, Liverpool. Phillips HS. 1953.

This article appears to have been titled and written in error about the wrong J. Dawson. The Captain J. Dawson that sailed on Mentor is captain James Dawson (Phillips 1953). John Dawson was James Dawson's grandson. So for instance John Dawson (slave trader) isn't correct. John Dawson, best I can tell, was just a Dawson shipbuilder (3rd generation) who wasn't of special note. The many references to "John" Dawson here and in other wiki pages should be corrected to James Dawson. Just putting the book front of Phillips (1953) to the right so this is clear as day.[1]

Cheers -- Crawdaunt (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2024 (UTC) Crawdaunt (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 September 2024

John Dawson (slave trader)James Dawson (slave trader). As above in section "James Dawson - John Dawson confusion", this article is titled after the wrong Dawson. Best -- Crawdaunt (talk) 00:05, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. There are 14 references that call this person John Dawson. This is a Wp:Bad faith nomination due to a dispute at Talk: Peter Baker (slave trader). The nominee is a self declared relative of both this person and Baker and has a blatant wo:coi. The source being referred to is self published and wp: primary, and was written by a family member, it is neither wp: independent nor wp:reliable. Desertarun (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The user is correct I have a self-declared COI as I am apparently many-generations since related to these people, which is really irrelevant to this name change since I never knew any of them. However, this name change is strictly a family record written by John Dawson's grandson that is here to correct what appears to be a systemic misnomer (likely an example of citogenesis). It is a bit bizarre to suggest this is somehow bad faith. The source this is based on is not primary, it is secondary, (per WP:PRIMARY/WP:SECONDARY), and comes from the permanent collection of the National Museums Liverpool (archive document as it was written by HS Phillips, whose grandfather was John Dawson (1799-1871). John Dawson's grandfather, James Dawson (1752-1824) is the only Captain J. Dawson alive in 1770s-80s, which is the period of time this article was written about. I really think the family of Dawson probably knew their own ancestor's names... The source (Phillips HS, 1953) is not independent, it's true. In this case, that is of clear benefit to realising this systemic error and possible citogenesis issue. -- Crawdaunt (talk) 02:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]