Talk:Philadelphia Convention
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Philadelphia Convention is part of the WikiProject Philadelphia, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. |
 |
Philadelphia Convention has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Contents |
[edit] FOEDERAL
The article begins "The Philadelphia Convention (also known as the Constitutional Convention, the Federal Convention, or in the newspapers of the time the "Foederal Convention" or merely the "Grand Convention at Philadelphia")..." This clearly needs revision, but I don't know what the papers of the time called it. Jonathunder 01:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- The papers of the time refered to it as either the "Grand Convention" (or the "Grand Convention at Philidelphia") or the "Foederal Convention." In the book that is understood to be the possibly the best account on the events of the Convention "Miracle at Philadelphia" by Catherine Drinker Bowen says on the last paragraph on page 4:
- "[...] Neither to the delegates nor the country at large was this meeting known as a constitutional Convention. How could it be? The title came later. The notion of a new 'constitution' would have scared away two-thirds of the members. Newspapers announce a Grand Convention at Philadelphia, or spike of the "Foederal Convention," always with the nice inclusion of the classical diphthong. [...]" -Demosthenes- 20:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Why do people keep changing "Foederal" to "Federal"? It was quite the common term in the 1700's. http://www.constitution.org/jadams/ja1_53.htm http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch6s13.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch8s30.html
Each person who vandalizes the page like this should get a warning, merely a subst:test, or we might have to lock the page down.
- This is just an archaic spelling/typeface for "Federal". It isn't a separate word. Putting it in the opening is just confusing to the reader. --JW1805 (Talk) 02:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
It's a part of history. -Demosthenes- 23:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Quote
Can anyone tell me the origin of the quote from William Findley? An accurate attributation would be very helful, as i'm keen to track it down.
[edit] Republican bias
Historial context, paragraph 3:
"In the ratification debate, Federalists exaggerated the desperate need for a new government."
Unsubstantiated claim. Seems to be skewed in favor of Republicans. William Findley was a "strong supporter of Thomas Jefferson," throwing his observations of Federalist motives into the biases of the day. Who is Louis Otto? How much weight can a visiting Frenchman's cursory inspection of the national economy have?
The paragraph preceding "Historical context" raises three reasons for the Philadelphia Convention - economic (revenue) and military (Shay's Rebellion, inability to cope with blockades). The paragraph in question unsubstantially places Federalist exaggerations in the economic field only. The Republicans were far more anti-military than the Federalists, and that, if anything, caused them to excessively downplay the crisis facing the Articles of Confederation. If we're going to talk partisan exaggeration, let's be fair. No less a party authority than Thomas Jefferson endorsed Shay's Rebellion ("I like a little rebellion now and then").
I think the paragraph in question should be deleted altogether. --Troznov 06:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Elijah Hodges
Who is Elijah Hodges? The same IP has added that name at least twice, but he's not in the standard list of delegates. Is this a vandal, or is Mr. Hodges attested? --Chaifilius 04:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
