This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
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.
I removed this part of the article for review. It might be included on the part on Indian Affairs, but it needs to be tied in contextually as something that occured because of his earlier work even though he lost welcome at the White House.--Magi Media 16:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Part of Lummis's legacy should include his work in the 1920's on behalf of the Pueblo Indians. At the urging of Mary Austin, Mabel Dodge Lujan introduced Lummis to a young social activist, John Collier. Together, Lummis and Collier fought the Bursum Bill which sought to open Indian ancestral lands for private sale and development. They also advised the the All Pueblo Council on how to circumvent an attempted take over by the Federal Government, intent on disenfranchising the power of the Pueblo confederation. When Collier was appointed to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, he was enable to enact many of the reforms Lummis attempted under President Theodore Roosevelt. For more information see Thompson's book, "American Character.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved Kotniski (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Most references I can link to refer to him as Charles Fletcher Lummis or at least Charles F. Lummis. I don't see any that are simply Charles Lummis. The original author actually created this at Charles Lummis in 2006 but apparently had second thoughts a few minutes later and created the article at this title instead. Station1 (talk) 12:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
And that jibes with naming conventions how exactly? Naming conventions say usually use shorter names. And doing a Bing search, I got 5-10x as many hits for Charles Lummis as for Charles Fletcher Lummis Purplebackpack89 15:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm basing that mostly on WP:UCN — "Articles are normally titled using the name which is most commonly used to refer to the subject of the article in English-language reliable sources. This includes usage in the sources used as references for the article" — and WP:NCP — "Generally, use the most common format of a name used in reliable sources: if that is with a middle name or an abbreviation, make the Wikipedia article title conform to that format. Examples: John F. Kennedy, Thomas John Barnardo, Annie M. G. Schmidt." A Google web search for "Charles Lummis" (with quotation marks) shows 15,500 results while "Charles Fletcher Lummis" shows 89,900, but more importantly none of the working links from the article called him simply Charles Lummis. I don't think it matters too much, as long as one redirects to the other, but I lean toward the current name. Station1 (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as the uncommon name. Forget web results. In most cases we should default to book and news archive results over web searches. The books results are that the full (current) name gets 32,700 hits; "Charles F. Loomis" returns 21,300; and the move target gets just 4,920 results.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The article states that he walked 3500 miles from Cincinnati to Los Angeles. Google Maps gives me a walking path of less than 2200 miles. Perhaps he did not walk the most direct route, but that ratio seems a bit high. Is there anyone here who has read his account of his trip and can verify 3500 miles? Sterrettc (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I haven't read his account, but sources say 3,500 miles. Over 143 days that's 25 miles a day, which is a lot but not impossible. Station1 (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
My issue is not that one could not walk 3500 miles in 143 days. My issue is that one could walk from Cincinnati to Los Angeles by way of Mazatlan, Mexico and it would be only 3258 miles, or by way of Calgary, Alberta, Canada and it would be only 3366 miles. Sterrettc (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)