Talk:Benjamin Jackson (sailor)

Overhaul

I am currently in the process of completely rewriting this article so it is more comprehensive and includes inline citations to more than one source. If anybody's interested, you can monitor my progress in my sandbox. Comment here if you'd like to contribute. Dugan Murphy (talk) 02:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Overhaul complete! Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

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 02:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Benjamin Jackson was likely paid at least $300 to fight in the American Civil War as Lewis Saunders?

• Source: Pages 197 and 198 of this book detail how Benjamin Jackson enlisted in the Union Navy in May 1864 as a substitute for a US citizen named Lewis Saunders, who was drafted, but had the opportunity to pay for a substitute to take his place. The fee Jackson received was likely at least $300. Because Jackson served as a substitute, he was enlisted under the Saunders name.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Space Babies
• Comment: Thank you in advance for reviewing my nomination!

5x expanded by Dugan Murphy (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 14 past nominations.

Dugan Murphy (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2024 (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: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Can't find any mention of 300 dollars in the book, accepted in good faith. TheNuggeteer (talk) 07:28, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Following the MOS

@Avi8tor: You just posted to my talk page, but given the subject, I think it's more appropriate to reply here. You said:

Hello Dugan Murphy. I notice you removed the convert template for Benjamin Jackson (sailor), contrary to the Manual of style. Wikipedia's aim is educating readers worldwide, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Units of measurement, states: that except for the USA and the UK, "the primary units chosen will be SI units", with a convert template, so no matter where you live, the reader will understand the unit. I'll add the convert template again to the article. Best regards, Avi8tor (talk) 05:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed your addition of the convert template because I was applying MOS:TIES to numbers. But having read more of the MOS, I agree with you that MOS:UNIT seems to apply better to this question. Because you didn't cite the MOS in your edit summary, introduced a grammar issue, and didn't add it consistently throughout the article, it didn't look to me like an attempt to improve the article. I'll fix the consistency and grammar issues right now. In the end, I think the article will better match MOS guidelines for the combined effort. Thank you for helping to improve this article! Dugan Murphy (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Dugan Murphy, The only item I changed was adding a convert template because I use hectares and it was missing. So no grammar issues there but I'm glad we're on the same page now. Regards, Avi8tor (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

A few items of note

Dugan Murphy - Apologies for not getting to this at the FAC, but I do have a few things to note here.

Thanks for bringing these things up. I'll respond to the issues once at a time. I may not be able to address them all quickly. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• "He returned home to Nova Scotia with a Civil War Campaign Medal " - he could not have returned home with this medal as this medal was not created/awarded until after 1900

The cited Coleman source for this sentence says "the Civil War Campaign Medal". Two other sources (Thompson and Kings County Advertiser) say "a Civil War Medal". None of them say exactly when he received the medal, so I will change the article now to reflect that temporal ambiguity. It looks like the TFA blurb does not need to be modified in this regard. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• " The Potomac was monitoring maritime traffic, stationed off the coast of Veracruz." - the DANFS entry for Potomac mentions her being converted into the stores ship at Pensacola during the war; I very strongly suspect that Potomac was doing this rather than monitoring Veracruz by 1864 (by then, steamers would have been used for the blockade as much as possible) but I have not been able to prove this yet. I will look into this more after I get off work. Page 331 of Lincoln's Trident by Browning references Farragut considering using Potomac as a hospital ship, but Instead, she served as a receiving ship in Pensacola. The context of this passage in the book is pre-1864 events

The cited DANFS source for this sentence says "At the outbreak of the Civil War, she departed New York 10 September 1861 for the West Gulf Blockade Squadron off Vera Cruz. She became the stores so for the squadron and remained at Pensacola Navy Yard as a receiving ship, until 1867, when she was sent to Philadelphia." So it's certainly unclear when that transfer happened from Veracruz to Pensacola. Unless you find something that better pins down that date, I could change the sentence to reflect that geographic ambiguity. What do you think? Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I've got a bunch of books at home, I'll try to see what I can find on this later today. Hog Farm _Talk 20:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Dugan Murphy - Here's what I've been able to turn up - the entry for Potomac in Silverstone's Warships of the Civil War Navies, on p. 128 has the following (in part) WGulfBS 1861. Receiving ship Pensacola 1861-67, and Philadelphia 1867-77 WGulfBS would be the West Gulf Blockading Squadron. The references to Potomac in Lincoln's Trident are blockading duty near Mississippi Sound on Christmas Eve 1861, (page 39) activities near Mobile "on the twenty-seventh" [not entirely clear to me if this is intended to be December 1861 or January 1862], (page 39) two of her ship's boats being involved in operations near Mobile in mid-January 1862, (page 40) being present at Pensacola at the Battle of Santa Rosa Island in October 1861 (page 51), a reference to her at Pensacola in December 1862 (page 245), her still being at Pensacola in February 1863 (page 267), and then the discussion of her being converted into a stores/receiving ship at Pensacola on page 331. The only other thing I've been able to turn up is a reference to her drawing too much water to be useful in the Christmas Eve 1861 incident on p. 137 of Chatelain's Defending the Arteries of Rebellion. Searching through the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies online she was on patrol off Veracruz as late as February 1862 (series 1, volume 18, p. 40). She was to be relieved at Veracruz by Hartford as of May 2, 1862. (didn't write down what page number I found that on). By June 30, 1862, Potomac is being referred to as a receiving ship, although then at Ship Island. (p. 661). Volume 19 is here I don't have time to dig through this tonight. I am so certain that Potomac was the receiving ship in Pensacola by the time Jackson was on it that I'm willing to stake 5 FAC reviews on this, but the 1861 date in Silverstone doesn't seem to be right and I'm having a hard time pinning down something that proves this straightforwardly. Hog Farm _Talk 02:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

The sources you mention above make it seem like the Potomac's main purpose during Jackson's term of service was serving as a receiving ship at Pensacola, even if she was taken out for a few other uses here and there. Based on that, I think I should remove the last two sentences of that paragraph that mentions the Potomac and add a few words at the end of the sentence that refers to her as an 88-gun frigate. Those words would place her in Pensacola as a receiving ship, citing Silverstone. Do you agree? And for citation purposes, are you referring to this 1989 edition? Dugan Murphy (talk) 08:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

If you want to, you can borrow the citation information from USS Marmora (1862) - I used the same physical copy for that FAC. Hog Farm _Talk 19:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for raising these issues and helping me resolve them. I really appreciate it. I think everything you brought up under this heading is now resolved. Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes - this looks much better now. Thank you for your patience with this; I wish I'd been able to get to this at the FAC. Hog Farm _Talk 21:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• During his navy service, Jackson picked up a live grenade from the deck of his ship and threw it overboard, likely saving the vessel and multiple lives; he later received a medal for this action. - the grenades of the Civil War times would almost certainly not have been a danger threatening the existence of a ship the size of those Jackson was on; I will note that the Coleman source reads Jackson grabbed a live shell that landed on his ship. The wording of this source suggests that this is referring to shell (projectile) not a grenade. I see Thompson calls this a grenade, but I find it odd that I can't find anything regarding this specific medal received in addition the Civil War Campaign Medal. There were far fewer US military medals in the 1860s that there are now. Local news sources are known to sometimes get facts about obscure historic items wrong, and this just isn't feeling right to me. I see Jackson has been added to a list of Medal of Honor recipients USS Richmond (1860)#Mobile Bay but I'm not seeing anything saying he won the MOH. Does Reid say anything about a medal received in addition to the campaign medal? I'm just not comfortable with using a passing, non-descriptive mention in a local news source for him being given a medal other than the campaign one. I've seen these sort of sources get things wrong too often in past.

Given that one source says "shell" and one source says "grenade", combined with your insight above, I'm going to change it now to shell in the article and in the TFA blurb. I agree with what you said about local news sources. On the assumption that Thompson is referring to the Civil War Campaign Medal and incorrectly attaching it to the shell/grenade incident, I will now change that in the article now and receive Jackson from the list of Medal of Honor recipients. Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and to answer your question, Reid says nothing about a medal, grenade, or shell. Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• "Following the command "Damn the torpedoes ... full speed ahead", the Richmond proceeded into the bay and fired upon four Confederate steamships" - I think this needs to be rephrased somewhat; see Battle of Mobile Bay#"Damn the torpedoes"; this is an enduring legend but there is significant doubt that these exact words were actually said

I see what you're saying about these other sources. What do you think of rewording to something like "Following the command popularly remembered as 'Damn the torpedoes ..."? I think the easy thing would be to remove the reference to the mythical quote, but since we know Jackson was present for this moment that is so well remembered, it seems noteworthy to include. What I don't think would be best is spending much time on exploring the ambiguity, since that would clearly be off topic. What do you think of my suggestion? Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I think this proposed version is much better. Hog Farm _Talk 22:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 08:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• " the Richmond proceeded into the bay and fired upon four Confederate steamships, all of which were captured by the US fleet" - what's the exact quote from DANFS here? My understanding is that one of the four was CSS Morgan, which did not surrender until May 1865, while the current article phrasing implies that these captures were associated with the battle, which took place in August 1864.

Good eye. Looking at DANFS again, it's clear the Richmond fired upon the Selma, Tennessee, Morgan, and Gaines. The text goes on to describe the capture of Selma, Tennessee, and Gaines, but doesn't say anything else about Morgan. I must have read that wrong. I'll remove right now the mention of Morgan's capture. Dugan Murphy (talk) 08:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to post a message at WT:MILHIST to try to get some attention to this matter of one or two medals and if "grenade" is really a good term for what he threw overboard. Also pinging @TFA coordinators because the grenade wording is currently in the TFA blurb, which is scheduled to run in roughly two weeks. Hog Farm _Talk 17:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

" a Civil War Campaign Medal" not "the Civil War Campaign Medal", so we need a source as to what it was. Slatersteven (talk) 17:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

It could have been a grenade, apart from the improbability both of an enemy getting within throwing range and anything throwable endangering the vessel. I am with Hog Farm that it was probably a shell, although a bomb is also possible. A similar British incident in 1854 involves what is described as a "shell". See Charles Davis Lucas. I recommend the TFA blurb referring to a shell, and suggest a similar tweak in the article. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

In older US accounts in particular, 'grenade,' 'shell,' and 'bomb' are often used interchangeably. I would agree 'shell' is probably the most accurate term here. As for the medal, there were any number of local medals struck at this time, and contemporary sources very frequently don't distinguish between them and official medals. The referenced campaign medal wasn't official until 1908 so it couldn't have been awarded prior to that date (meaning he couldn't have returned home with it as HF notes). There were no other campaign medals from the Civil War, and this one is actually considered one of the first (if not the first) authorized by the US military. Jackson isn't listed on the Navy's official MoH list [1]https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/heritage/awards/decorations/medal-of-honor/civil-war-medal-of-honor-recipients.html, but it's not complete so that might not be definitive. Intothatdarkness 18:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)