User talk:Cmguy777

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, Cmguy777, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Thomas Jefferson and slavery, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Contents

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle[edit]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carl Schurz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Snake River Scene Edit.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Snake River Scene Edit.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 21:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant presidential administration scandals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George H. Williams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Industrial Age (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Shurlz[edit]

...that's a new one. Do you use speech recognition software?  ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what you are implying by srs. I do not use that. Cmguy777 (talk) 08:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I was trying to be funny. There seems to be structural impossibility for many English speakers to get my name right, either mangling the given name, or the family name (which is surprising, given that Charles M. Schulz with the same name is quite well-known). You added a new variant that I don't recall having seen previously here. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I apologize. There was a German born U.S. Senator Carl Schurz who stated "My country right or wrong..." That is why I believe I added the "r". When I get typing fast I tend to make spelling errors. Cmguy777 (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

No need to apologize - you're not the first (by far), you will not be the last, and I do make typos all the time, too. But thanks for fixing it. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Woodrow Wilson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Jefferson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Creswell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Debonair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John F. Kennedy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Segregation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

TFX fighter-bomber controversy[edit]

The section looks fine to me. Good job. Kierzek (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Kiersek. Good job. I added more on the F-111 costs and history. Cmguy777 (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Good detail therein. You may want to copy-edit some of it over to the F-111 article. BTW- Something else which may be of interest to you is adding a section on the 1960 U-2 incident into the main body of Dwight D. Eisenhower. It is very briefly mentioned in the lede but not the main article and is something which should be a sub-section. I don't have the time today, and thought it may be of interest to you. Kierzek (talk) 17:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Part of the TFX fighter-bomber controversy can added to the F-111 article. The 1968 Life Magazine article is really neat because it went over what the TFX program was and what pilots thought of the plane and the controversy between the Navy and the Air Force. Cmguy777 (talk) 22:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

That sounds interesting. Kierzek (talk) 23:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Strategic Hamlet Program[edit]

I added the lede sentences to JFK, as discussed and added the corresponding information and links on the Strategic Hamlet Program into the Southeast Asia section. Please add the book cite pages therein. The paperback version: Karnow, Stanley (1991). Vietnam, A History. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-670-74604-0 is already in the Bibliography section (it is cited in the article already from a past addition). Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 01:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Kierzek. The edit really adds to the article. Behind the Peace Corp Kennedy was excalating the Vietnam War. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:07, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Okay. We still need the Karnow page cites; I don't have the paperback book anymore. Also, if you have the time maybe you can add the needed cites to the Strategic Hamlet Program article; I saw some cn there. Kierzek (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

The Strategic Hamlet program is cited on pages 272-273 in the Karnow (1997) book Vietnam. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for putting that in. Kierzek (talk) 02:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Your welcome. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

George S. Boutwell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Black Friday
John F. Kennedy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Washington

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

JFK talk page is not a forum[edit]

I reverted your latest entry because the talk page is not for discussion of the topic. Instead, it is for improvement of the article. Binksternet (talk) 23:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I resent having my talk page discussion being deleted. I was defending my view that discussing J. Edgar Hoover, the Secret Service, and Marilyn Monroe would improve the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013[edit]

Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:John F. Kennedy for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I have not used Kennedy talk page as a forum. I resent being accused. I could say you and other editors have a forum also and that is the protection of Kennedy's legacy. That is POV. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:COOL[edit]

Thanks S. Rich. Cmguy777 (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
CMguy -- you are taking those comments much too personally. This is just Wikipedia, where everyone volunteers their efforts. But you are not helping the project, or yourself, by adding comments about how you do not like what other editors are saying about you. Come on. Stop. Take a WikiBreak. – S. Rich (talk) 02:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Are you refering to the Huell Howser article? I told them I was going to take a break, but they kept berating me. I have to defend my reputation as an editor. They need to stop too. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes. You are re-acting on a talk page about an article with comments that do not help improve the article. If you don't like the way they are treating you, bring it up on their talk pages. Not the article talk page. – S. Rich (talk) 02:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't want this to escalate anymore then it has, but they have not talked to me on my talk page. They berated me in the discussion page so I responded in the discussion page. Again. I can take a break from the article. I believe the Huell Howser article needs to be expanded and improved. However, I am open to taking a break from discussion. Thanks S. Rich. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. I hatted the Howser discussion, and I think reopening it would not help anyone. Take your break, then consider where we can achieve consensus for improvements on Howser, and make your edits along those lines. WP is not about who's right or wrong, but about how we work together to achieve a better product. While you are on your break, consider offering those guys a {{cheeseburger}} and say you're sorry that you got hot under the collar. (Use their talkpages to do so.) My bet is that they will enjoy the cheeseburgers and all will be well with the world. Regards. – S. Rich (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
I can apologize on their respected talk pages. Ironically, I used the talk page to work out any disagreements and to find consensus. Cmguy777 (talk) 03:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Face-smile.svgS. Rich (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your apology[edit]

Usually, I just respond to a comment on one talk page, and perhaps place a "talk back" message on the other. In this case, noticing the conversation above, I am responding in both places.

Your apology is gracious, appreciated, but not really necessary. Nothing you said offended me. This is a common disagreement about content, not anything personal. You have accepted the consensus about the rumor, and perhaps a better source on that issue will come along in the future. So there we disagreed, but you brought forward a very useful source for expanding less contentious aspects of the Howser biography. For that, I am sincerely grateful. So let's all cool down, put disagreement behind us, and then collaborate to improve this article about a man who truly loved California, as I do. I am sure you do as well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Bravo to you both! – S. Rich (talk) 04:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Billie Sol Estes affair[edit]

I added another cite to the info. I wrote on the JFK talk page as to the Agriculture/Texas/LBJ affair. As you probably know, Estes just died with his body discovered on 14 May. One of these days some of this LBJ "information" we have discussed over the recent months on the JFK talk page (including this matter) needs to be added in a NPOV way to Johnson's article. I just don't have the time right now. Kierzek (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Kierzek. Yes. Estes recently died and I believe the New York Times did a good article and possibly filled in gaps. Johnson was Vice President at the time of the Estes scandal. Kennedy had to answer to charges of corruption under Secretary of Agriculture Freeman. The part concerning Johnson could be put in the Johnson article. Kennedy did know about the "murder" of the investigator in Texas. However, he was told the murder had to do with an affair rather then the Estes investigation. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Personal Attacks re USA talk[edit]

Hi, I have read this part of the USA talk page four times now. I don't see where you have been accused of racism. As far as I can tell, you have not. Perhaps I have missed something. I have seen a sentence that suggests the article is starting looks like it has been written by a racial activist. That is an editor's opinion on the flavor of the writing that doesn't mention you or any editor by name. If, however, you think there has been a personal attack you should consider taking it to the person's talk page and possibly WP:ANI. Repeating your accusations on the article talk page again and again is not helpful and may, in fact, be considered by some to be personal attacks in its own right. At the very least it doesn't lead to cool and calm discussion of issues. The talk page is for the article, ANI and personal talk pages are for resolving NPA issues. For What Its Worth. Capitalismojo (talk) 15:43, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Just to be clear. If you have been accused of racism by another editor, I suggest immediately talking to them on their talk page and consider taking it to ANI. It is a personal attack that is improper. Capitalismojo (talk) 15:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for you concern Capitalsmojo. Gwillhickers has never apologized. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Canbys Cross Memorial Site Photo.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Canbys Cross Memorial Site Photo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John C. Frémont may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:34, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:General John Charles Frémont Healy.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:General John Charles Frémont Healy.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Coverage of Architect on Jefferson page[edit]

Hi Cm', we are still discussing whether or not to include 'Architect' in the infobox and moreover, whether we should cover this better in the article itself with a subsection, so we need more informed opinions from people who have been involved with the page. -- Gwillhickers 18:56, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Grant sub-articles[edit]

Hey Cmguy, I mentioned an idea I had here, but I think it got lost among our other discussions. What do you think? --Coemgenus (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Missing book ref at Marshall Jewell[edit]

Could you please clarify the book ref 'Holloway' that you cite in your work at Marshall Jewell. Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I added book reference: Laura Carter Holloway (1885), 'Famous American Fortunes and the Men who Have Made Them' Cmguy777 (talk) 06:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Citation[edit]

I'm trying to format that citation you left on U.S. Grant. Does that article have a title or an author? Is it online? If so, let me know and I'll add it. I'm trying to keep things orderly. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Coemgenus. I got from JSTOR article: The Racial Views of Ulysses S. Grant The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education No. 66 (Winter 2009/2010), pp. 26-27. I could not find an author to the article. The article was published by the The JBHE Foundation, Inc. Here is the article URL: The Racial Views of Ulysses S. Grant.
Thanks, I'll try to sort it all out. --Coemgenus (talk) 01:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome Coemgenus. I thought and African American point of view would help out. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:24, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Is that a peer reviewed journal? It looks like a trade magazine. --Coemgenus (talk) 01:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
The article was in JSTOR, a non-profit, not a publisher site, that gives access to 1,500 archived journals. I don't know if The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education is peer reviewed. The journal looks to be more then a "trade magazine" having articles on African American issues. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:53, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I know what JSTOR is, I'm more concerned that the article lacks footnotes. And an author. --Coemgenus (talk) 01:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree there is a concern on not stating an author. I wanted an African American perspective on Grant. Black historians believe Lincoln, Grant, and Benjamin Franklin were anti racist in their policies. McPherson confirms the Election of 1872 was a fair election. Possibly we could look for alternative sources that confirm the articles statements. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Your feedback on "United States"[edit]

Thanks for posting your feedback on "United States".

You posted this comment on 27 June 2013 (view all feedback).

This article ignores slavery in the North and South and how slavery was the foundation of America rather then freedom or being a republic. You can't be a republic and millions of slaves. I suggest that instead of reading Wikipedia, read other books that have a less impartial view of history and are not afraid to tackle controversial issues.

One of Wikipedia's founding principles is to be completely unbiased, impartial, and neutral in all affairs. The article "Slavery in the United States" provides plenty of insight in to the role of slaves, slavery, and slave trade in the US's history. Another Wikipedia article, entitled "Treatment of slaves in the United States", gives an even more in depth look at slavery in the United States.

Furthermore, one cannot claim that Wikipedia is partial with regards to the role of slavery in the United States' history; people from all over the world contribute to Wikipedia, not just Americans. Wikipedia is not "afraid to tackle controversial issues", thus its articles about topics ranging from the Vietnam War to gay rights; the Holocaust to global warming; child labor, sex trafficking, illegal drugs, hate crimes, the 2013 IRS scandal, free speech, Nazism, capital punishment, atheism, Glenn Beck, intensive animal farming, hydraulic fracturing, Playboy magazine, rape, creationism, self-harm, abortion, obesity, genocide, and terrorism, to name a few. Next time, think before you write.

Also, fix your grammatical issues: it's than not then, and your second sentence is, in actuality, but a fragment. I apologize for my fastidiousness, but it was warranted by your unfounded comments. Hea päev, härra. We appreciate your contributions to this page!

Dylanvt (talk) 23:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar of Cooperation[edit]

Halfstar Hires.png The Half Barnstar
For your continued good work on the difficult task of bringing the Ulysses S. Grant presidential biography and associated articles to a high quality, and for keeping cool while pursuing resolution and cooperation with User:Coemgenus even when disagreeing, I award you this distinctively shared barnstar. Cooperation as Wikipedians even when disagreeing is the hallmark of the Wikipedia community's best members. Congratulations. BusterD (talk) 22:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year Cmguy777![edit]

Fireworks in Jaén (cropped).jpg
Happy New Year!
Hello Cmguy777:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BusterD (talk) 06:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


Peace sign.svg


Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.


Ping![edit]

-- Gwillhickers 01:21, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Aaron Rawlins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles A. Dana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ulysses S. Grant cultural depictions may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • //www.imdb.com/title/tt0531288/ '''''The Assassins: Part One''''']], IMBD, viewed on 02-01-2014]]</ref><ref>[[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0531289/ '''''The Assassins: Part Two''''']], IMBD, viewed

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

For your information[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is necessarily any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Cailil talk 14:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Just so you are clear on this Cmguy777 the above is purely a notification and not an accusation of misconduct. But if you are going to make edits relating to the Men's rights movement you need to know that this is an area covered by a probation due to on and off disruption of this site's processes and policies in that topic area--Cailil talk 14:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

For the record I did not ever edit on the Men's rights movement article! Cmguy777 (talk) 15:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant[edit]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Ulysses S. Grant. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 01:37, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Ulysses S. Grant. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Ulysses S. Grant – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. reddogsix (talk) 02:00, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

worth adding to Grant bibliog[edit]

to the bio and to the bibl articles: A Companion to the Reconstruction Presidents 1865-1881 (Wiley Blackwell Companions to American History) by Edward O. Frantz (Jun 3, 2014) online Rjensen (talk) 05:28, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Rjensen. This can be added to the Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant article. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
yes and it's important enough for the main article too. Parts are on Amazon--see ch 16 pp 328 on what has been written on Grant. VERY useful suggestions for the Bibliog article. Rjensen (talk) 23:39, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Rjensen. I have tried to look up page 328 through Amazon and Google but the page has not been displayed. The book has allot of good information from what I have read so far. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I added the A Companion Guide to the Reconstruction Presidents 1865-1881 source to the Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant article. Cmguy777 (talk) 05:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

For you[edit]

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your efforts at building, organizing and composing the Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant        
-- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


Thanks Rjensen Gwillhickers! The The American Presidency Project at the University of Santa Barbara really helped the Grant Bibiliography article. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
That's one of the things I liked about the article, that it offered insights into the accounts on USGrant. Btw, my user name isn't Rjensen. Face-smile.svg -- Gwillhickers (talk) 02:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Gwillhickers. I made a correction to the thanks. I appreciate the award Gwillhickers. I was not completely aware you read the Ulysses S. Grant article. From what I have read both Jefferson and Grant had rational personalities. Cmguy777 (talk) 08:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Cmguy777. Thap potentially ambuiguous remark led me at once to Blockade runners of the American Civil War, where they had at least a 80% rate of success. Do you have a rational answer to that, Gwillhickers ? --Askedonty (talk) 11:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Cm', I was referring to the USG bibliography when I referred to 'the article' above. Btw, I noticed you're using the 'cite book' template to list sources. I did the same thing when I first began building the Bibliography of early American naval history but after a while there were so many templates on one page it caused page load/save problems due to server overload, as every time the page was saved all of those templates had to be initialized at once. At one point it took a minute or more for a save to go through. As soon as I removed the templates and just listed the sources using straight text the problem disappeared. Since the sources in the Bibliography of Ulysses S. Grant are not linked up to citations there's no need for the cite book templates. The USGrant bibliography isn't quite that large yet but it's something to think about. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 12:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Askedonty, I'm not sure I'm following you here. What was said here that led you to the Blockade runners' article? in any case, the success rate of blockade runners varied, and got worse as the war progressed. The 80% is an overall figure, and accounts do vary somewhat. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 12:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Grant and Eureka[edit]

Greetings Cmguy777: I have made some slight changes over at U.S. Grant's page as there was kerfuffle that he was not an historic person in Eureka, California. I have added a couple of citations, and one of them presents a date difficulty. Grant was at Fort Humboldt from August to April (five months) but the article formerly said he was there nearly a year. I found a citation and have changed it. There is at least one anonymous editor making changes to Eureka, California claiming Grant was not a notable person in history who was there, so I have changed the wording in the Grant article to nail down that where Fort Humboldt is now is entirely within the city limits of Eureka. BTW, it is not true there is no local mention of his drunkeness. Seth Kinman writes in his memoirs extensively about Grant's insobriety - it's why Kinman would have nothing to do with him, an attitude echoed by many of the contemporary locals. Even the name of the saloon where he spend most of his time is recorded! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:56, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your changes to the article Ellin Beltz. Would not August to April be August, September, November, December, January, February, March, April be eight months. Is Seth Kinman a reliable source? Also who is to determine whether Grant was drunk without any sobriety testing. Grant's drunkeness appears to be subjective. Buchannan may have heard, not observed, that Grant was drunk when he was off duty and charged him with drunkeness on duty. No one is doubting that Grant drank on the coast but the question is whether Grant was fairly discharged from the U.S. Military. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi: My edits were summarily reverted despite providing citation to the correct date of his discharge which was in April. His unit was summoned to north coast in August, travel was not instantaneous - there were no airports then. The unit arrived at some time later than August, and he quit in April, about "five months later" as was remarked by the anonymous editor. August of 1853 to July of 1854 would be eleven months or closer to a year. The citation I provided gave the exact dates. The article has the wrong date "July 31, 1854" uncited.

I personally don't care if Grant drank water or wine, my concern is that the date is incorrect. The article makes a quoted mention that there are no contemporary reports of his insobriety which is incorrect but it's unimportant because it's clearly cited. I made no attempt to change it regardless of whether there are local reports of his bad behavior or not. Is Seth Kinman reliable? Did I cite him in the article? No, I cited a biography about Grant and mentioned Kinman here to you as you seem to have an interest in Grant. Kinman was contemporary with him and has a lot to say about him in his memoirs.

I did what I was told to do by an admin (which was "put it on the talk page"). Subsequently there were cranky comments made on the talk page, and my edit fixing the date error (with citations) was knee-jerk reverted. I doubt if the reverting editor even read it. I don't understand the "importance" of ownership of any article on Wiki that would bring out the cranky and points-scoring with other editors who provide information and citations. Perhaps they disagreed with me maintaining the Eureka page against anonymous removal edits, but there's no reason to lose the polite and go for the points-scoring.

Regardless. I have a personal policy Wiki editing that when I run into a seriously pwnd article like this one, I remove myself from the equation. Let the nasty be nasty, I wash my hands of Grant, he and his talk page are coming off my watchlist. I won't be the one to return him to Eureka, he was there before I ever edited the Eureka page, and if he returns you all can fight it out with someone else. Any date errors and lack of citation for facts in the Grant article are no longer my problem. Have a lovely day. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:30, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort on editing Grant and concern for the correct date. You would have to talk with Coemgenus why Coemgenus reverted the edit although Coemgenus did give reasons why Coemgenus reverted the edit. The initial narration was good and compact. Apparently Seth Kinman mentioned this in his Memoirs rather then a direct journal. We have no proof Kinman ever met Grant. Does Grant mention Kinman in his Memoirs? "Cranky edits" are common on Wikipedia. I understand that getting an edit reverted is not fun. Thanks for your talk contributions and concern for the Grant article. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

There is an entire chapter on Grant in Eureka, in Irvine, History of Humboldt County California - Historic Record Co., Los Angeles, 1915 CHAPTER VII. - Grant's Career in Humboldt County pages 52 to 62. It details many specifics including the dates of commission, arrival, departure and life in the county which Grant found dreary. It also confirms that Fort Humboldt was in Eureka. One paragraph in that chapter reads "Fresh beef was not always to be had, but Grant made a contract with Seth Kinman, a famous hunter of those days, to supply the commissary department with elk meat. After Grant became president of the United States, old Seth Kinman traveled to Washington and presented his old-time friend with a chair made of polished elk horns." As for did they ever meet, yes I think they did. Does Grant mention Kinman? I have no idea. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:44, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

My question is what source(s) did the Historic Record Co. Los Angeles (1915) get this information from? i.e. Seth Kinman? Also does this book mention anything about Grant's drinking? The other issue is that 1915 is not the most recent source, 99 years ago. I am currently going through the article to improve narration and accuracy of the article for FA. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
The above source Historic Record Co. Los Angeles (1915) states "A vast amount of cloudy tradition has grown up regarding his (Grant) stay in Humboldt." This, in my opinion, means we need to be wary about what is said about Grant in Humboldt. Coemgenus added the word "effective" to the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Kellogg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Jefferson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haitian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orville E. Babcock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Friday. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reconstruction. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Ulysses S. Grant[edit]

Hello, just saw that this article failed at FAC. It's a shame since I saw you've spent quite some time on the article, and I didn't even get to leave input before the nomination closed. I've done some copyediting to the article, and if you'd like can give suggestions for improvement through its talk page. Better luck next time. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 01:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Valliant efforts, so do not be discouraged, if this is still something you want, take Snuggums up on his offer and keep plugging. Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Thanks. I would appreciate input into the article. Suggestions for article improvement are welcome ! Cmguy777 (talk) 18:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
@Alanscottwalker: Thanks. I won't get discouraged. The article is much improved due to the FA review. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Freedmen's Bureau, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Codes. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Jackson portrait[edit]

Hi Cmguy77- My first attempt was to create the feeling of a closely cropped image without cropping the original file. I tried adding the whole image. If it doesn't work just let me know. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 04:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:CSS_image_crop is what I used...-Godot13 (talk) 04:26, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Godot13 Hi. The thumb format is good but the photo needs to be cropped more. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 05:13, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrew Jackson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Louis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyedited previous ping.[edit]

I have copyedited my previous ping at Talk: Jefferson and slavery. My point is that Jefferson’s views and proposals over time and circumstance should be reflected in the article. In our discussions, we should try to stay focused on Jefferson and his times. I mean to withdraw my heated remarks directed at Cmguy777 there. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Porter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrew Jackson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Sergeant. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Secede/Succeed, Secession/Succession[edit]

I found this webpage that may be of use to you: Secede vs. succeed174.141.182.82 (talk) 22:13, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Amos T. Akerman[edit]

Thank you for your substantial contributions to Amos T. Akerman. In January 2012 you created two repeatedly-used named refs that don't fully inform the reader what they are. Specifically:

  • At 22:19, 10 January 2012 you introduced <ref name="Parker (9/12/2002)">Parker (9/12/2002), ''Amos T. Akerman (1821-1880)''</ref>
  • At 01:56, 23 January 2012 you introduced <ref name="Brown, (1997)">Brown (1997), ''Amos T. Akerman 1821-1880''</ref>

I could not find a book in the Library of Congress catalog based on these descriptions. If these are journal references, please provide more complete references including the journal name, article title, author, page numbers, etc. If these are book chapters, please provide the book title, editor, publisher, ISBN, etc. Also, if these are book references, the book(s) should probably go under "Sources" and then you could use short references with page numbers on each ref to each of the two sources. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I will have to check to find the orginal sources... Cmguy777 (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I fixed the Parker (9/12/2002) reference...trying to find the Brown (1997) reference...I may use a reference replacement... Cmguy777 (talk) 16:45, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

George Henry Williams[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to George Henry Williams. In May 2012 you added a reference to a book, perhaps with an incorrect copyright date. Specifically:

  • At 20:24, 31 May 2012 you introduced <ref name=DOAB>Dictionary of American Biography (1936), ''George Henry Williams''</ref>

The listings at catalog.loc.gov show 23 books with that title, none copyright 1936. Would you please provide the book title, editor, publisher, and possibly correct the date? —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:36, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Here is the link: Williams George Henry Dictionary of American Biography (1936) Editor is Dumas Malone... Cmguy777 (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Your welcome ! Cmguy777 (talk) 20:28, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Help on Tom Graves?[edit]

Hi there, I recently proposed some changes to the article for Rep. Tom Graves, as a consultant on his behalf, so I think it's best that I avoid editing directly myself. However, it's been two weeks and no one has responded. Since you're active on U.S. politics and history, I thought I'd see if you'd be willing to take a look. Currently, some sections are lacking in detail or WP:RS citations, or both, and I'm offering some suggestions to fix these issues. I also see a few areas where the wording does not conform to the cited source and / or is not encyclopedic. To start, I've made a few suggestions on the Talk page here. If you're able to review, let me know! Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the invitation...I will have to decline...I am from California...I don't know anything about current Georgia politics...thanks...my focus has been on former Presidents particularly Ulysses S. Grant and Thomas Jefferson... Cmguy777 (talk) 00:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, that's fine. I should add that the issues on the page don't require any special knowledge about Georgia politics, but about general Wikipedia issues. But since it seems you're busy on these pages, I'll keep looking. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 17:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

U.S.Grant FAC[edit]

@Cmguy777, Coemgenus, and Rjensen: Cm', I'm responding to your inquiry here as apparently my continued participation on the Grant talk page will be counter productive in terms of stability/FAC, as I have been strongly asserting the idea that many major details are missing -- including an entire topic: private and boarding school in Kentucky. I have been doing much reading on Grant this past couple of weeks, on line and at the library, where I have also ordered several modern books. I think I can safely say that almost any source on Grant, new or old, worth its salt will at least mention Grant's first journey away from home where he attended a seminary in Maysville, and then a boarding school in Ripley, both across the Ohio River in Kentucky, not far from his home in Georgetown, Ohio. Here are some sources, one old, two new (1, 2). While page length is a legitimate concern I would at least try to cover this topic with at least a good sentence. This topic involves the four years leading up to Grant's enrollment at West point. Good luck guys. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the topic is important and should be included. I reject the idea that artificial length limitations should be imposed by outsiders who don't know much about Ulysses Grant or American generals and presidents. Rjensen (talk) 21:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Rjensen. Yes, that's always been one of my beefs with the FA process altogether - reviewers who don't know much at all about the subject while they focus their 'criticism' on one, academic, idea. While there are practical limits to any narrative it would seem that as long as the 'content' is inclusive and comprehensive that this page length guideline could be waved, or at least not adhered to in such a dogmatic manner. If page length is the only 'criticism' that can be levied against this FAC I will voice my disapproval towards such narrow estimations at FAC. Hope I am not alone in the effort. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
GWhillickers, you can always work to change the FA guidelines, too. Some people might agree with you. I just aim to follow the rules of this place, and I know working for that sort of bureaucratic change might be frustrating, but if it's something you feel strongly about, you should go for it. You might change some minds. And, if it makes you feel better, the upper limits of length have been gradually getting longer for years now. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Ideally, all of us would cooperate to try to adhere to policies and standards. Unilaterally excepting oneself from the rules is not only self-defeating, but defeats the efforts of good-faith editors who are trying to abide by the rules. RJensen, since you've had actual books published, you know you have to agree with the editor or find a different publisher. The same principle applies here: the rules for FAs are well-established, and unless they are changed, each contributor should take care to abide by them. Otherwise, s/he falls into WP:DISRUPT.
Coemgenus has not asserted ownership of the article, but has steadfastly been collegial. I do not assign ownership to him, either, but beg you all to consider the labor he has invested in it and at least let him bring it to FA in peace. This page and this one reveal some of the time, thought, and skill he has spent on it. Yo Pienso (talk) 23:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
@Gwillhickers: I agree that a sentence or two on Grant's education would be appropriate for the article. But let's be realistic, Grant was no theologian, he was general and President. Coemgenus does not own the article, but he has steadfastly getting the article up to FA standards following Wikipedia rules. I believe editors can work together, respectfully within reasonable size limits, to get Grant to FA. What is a reasonable size can be debated by editors if current wikipedia rules allow. In my opinion that should be the primary goal. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 23:53, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not have any rules about article length-- they merely have guidelines. Those were originally written in the days of telephone modems in which downloading time and expense was a serious issue. Back in Ulysses Grant's day, telegrams were very expensive and people paid very close attention to how few words they could use. Postage was expensive too, especially international letters. So what people did was write very small covering both sides of the sheet. Then they would turn the page sideways, use a different color ink, and keep writing so that they had four pages of text on one sheet of paper. (you can still see these In historical Society archives-- the pages are just barely legible in their original format, and when xeroxed into black and white I found them to be absolutely illegible.) Those days are over. As for book publishers, I've dealt with many of them, and I've also been on the editorial boards of a dozen scholarly journals. They have to pay real money for longer page counts; so they cut corners anywhere they can. For example, they very rarely use color photographs because of the expense. Rjensen (talk) 05:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Whatever the length of the article is I would hope the quality of the article can get to FA status. My current view is that the article would be good between 130,000 to 150,000 bytes to get to FA status. Seperate articles on Grant's life are good for adding more details that are available in reliable sources. I am not against adding additional information as long as Grant can get to FA status. I don't think the article should be edited in smaller because content on his military career and presidency would be lost. I started the Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant article so more information and neutrality could be given for an understudied presidency. Possibly more information can add to the neutrality of the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
This might be a compromise if one is needed: how about setting a 150,000 byte cap on the article until the article gets to FA status. I do believe who ever is responsible for granting the FA status of the article needs to state what size is best for the article if not already stated. I think there is concensus that the article will not be reduced anymore in size for content purposes. Cmguy777 (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Please see WP:FACR, particularly 4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style. Then please click on "summary style," and from there, on "Wikipedia:Article size," which has a "Readability issues" section and a size guideline rules of thumb. The FA reviewers apply these guidelines. Yo Pienso (talk) 19:56, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

At 14,081 words (a more useful measurement than bytes) it is the longest FA or GA-class article about a president, and would be among the longest FAs on any topic. I don't want to cut any more, but I do think there's good reasons for keeping it as it is, especially when an increasingly large share of our audience accesses the encyclopedia on a mobile device, with the small screen size and data restrictions that entails. --Coemgenus (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

edit break[edit]

  • @Coemgenus: This is an encyclopedia, not some quick reference for mobile devices, and as such we should keep the standards at existing levels, not lowering them so kiddies and others can play with their smart toys. Anyone who's doing historical and scientific research, etc, usually isn't hopping about town and logging on to WP. If we were to begin catering to the smart toy crowd, we may as well start with deleting all the high res images and shrinking all the GA and FA articles so they look like outlines. A different topic. We were discussing brief mention of boarding school. Adding a sentence or two isn't going to make or break page length issues. If you also think this should be included, just do it -- no one is going to hollar 'page length' if you do. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • @Cmguy777: -- You said you would not oppose adding info about Grant's educational involvements in Kentucky. bear in mind that Grant doesn't have to be a "theologian" to warrant mentioning this four year period of his life. Rjensen and myself also think this topic needs to be included. Yes, page length is a consideration -- but so is a well covered and comprehensive article. Leaving such a big gap in the narrative is sloppy editorship, and not consistent with the very fine job done covering the Civil War. Reading the Overland Campaign and victory section was an absolute pleasure -- well covered, good writing and comprehensive. We need to do the same for the entire article, regardless of page length. No, this doesn't mean we start dumping content into the narrative at every juncture, but we should at least include some of the major details still missing, not to mention an entire topic regarding Grant's first journey away from home in Kentucky. Leaving out an entire chapter of Grant's life because of a page length guideline is not acceptable. if we must we can always trim down the Later Reconstruction and civil rights, Foreign affairs and the Panic of 1873, the Long Depression, and currency debates sections -- they are all quite long, much longer than some of the sections covering Grant's involvements in Civil War battles. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
@Gwillhickers:I don't understand you want to add to Grant's personal life but cut information on one of the most under studied Presidents in United States. The Presidency section looks fine and does not need any cutting. That would reduce content...I am not against adding information but oppose cutting information from the article...I proposed a cap of 150,000 words...That is called a compromise...That would be best for the article in my opinion... Cmguy777 (talk) 23:26, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
@Cmguy777: -- I'm for adding as much content as is practically possible. I thought by now that was sort of clear. I suggested trimming a few very long sections as a "compromise" with those who are reluctant to see this article grow another 'inch'. In any event, the biography is missing an entire chapter in Grant's life. Leaving the small town of Georgetown and arriving in Maysville on the Ohio River, a busy trading port with ships and riverboats coming and going, and then nearby Ripley, was the first real taste of the world Grant, beginning at age 13, had experienced. Coverage of this advent can be accomplished with two or three sentences without any appreciable concern for page length.
While we're at, in many if not all presidential biographies cover of family and ancestry is standard OP. This biography has (very) little to say about family and nothing to say about Grant's ancestors (beginning with Mathew Grant) who were Puritans and arrived from Plymouth, the descendants of whom fought in the French and Indian and Revolutionary wars. This also can be covered with a short passage. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:49, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
@Gwillhickers: I believe a biography article on Grant's family would be good...I am in favor of adding more information on Grant family history to the main article but limited compared to a potential full seperate article on Grant's family... Cmguy777 (talk) 19:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
  • @Cmguy777, Rjensen, and Coemgenus: -- Most if not all presidents have family and ancestry well covered under a 'Early life'(+ -) section, and with not a lot of 'bytes' in some cases. e.g.Washington(GA, much coverage), Lincoln(GA, much coverage), Jefferson, Reagan(FA), Obama(FA), et al. Grant's family/ancestry, very interesting stuff, btw, can be covered with two or three sentences (if we must employ the bare minimum) and his stay in Kentucky at private schools can also be so covered, with no appreciable impact on page length. It would seem that if some reviewer is 'not' going to approve this FAC simply because of page length, he/she will do so with or without coverage of these missing topics. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

U.S. Grant Lede[edit]

The Ku Klux Klan is mentioned twice in the lead, while topics like Abraham Lincoln are mentioned once. The second mention of the klan is a detail already covered in the text. I'd recommend omitting the second instance. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree ! Cmguy777 (talk) 23:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Fixed Cmguy777 (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Please hold off on Grant article and on talk page[edit]

Hi, Cmguy, I think you don't realize that you jeopardize the promotion of the article to FA when you keep making suggestions and trying to insert and/or delete material. I believe you want to see it promoted, so please, take a break now. Thanks. YoPienso (talk) 21:17, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Please. If you want this to pass, please relax and stop pushing for more changes. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
I can take a break, but seems unfair when other editors are allowed to edit and I am not...I can take a hint...good luck with your article... Cmguy777 (talk) 03:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not editing there until after the article passes--or fails--FA. And maybe not even then. Coemgenus, Wehwalt, and I have suggested that everyone--not just you--stand down for awhile. I still disagree with the addition of Grant's signing the Yellowstone bill, but I ain't touchin' it, or even mentioning it on the talk page. I came to your page for two reasons: 1. You didn't stop or agree to stop. 2. I didn't want to add more activity on the article talk page.
I'm not sure everyone understands that the article is supposed to be a cohesive summary that doesn't really include tangential facts. YoPienso (talk) 04:36, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I hope I am allowed to comment on my own talk page...the Reputation looks good...but to state "well below average" is counter intuative to the positive research of Brands and Smith...when encountering civil rights Grant is in the top ten in one historical poll...the readers don't understand most Presidential polls exclude civil rights. Cmguy777 (talk) 16:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Playing the victim doesn't help you or anybody else; of course you can comment on your own talk page. I assume I'm welcome; if not, please advise. You may certainly hide or delete my comments at will.
With a degree in history, you should be able to understand presidential rankings:
  • Wikipedia aggregates a number of them.
  • USN&WR ranks him as the 7th worst.
  • Infoplease notes the original Schlesinger ranking put him in the bottom category--failure. YoPienso (talk) 01:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I do understand presidential rankings...they do not take into consideration the whole presidency...also concerning Grant...only one poll covered Civil Rights...Grant get's low rankings because Civil Rights is left out of the polls...also historians have stated Fish was one of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History...Grant gets know recognition... Cmguy777 (talk) 04:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't put a lot of stock in many modern day assessments of U.S. Presidents. As with Jefferson, claims, often isolated and out of context, are often politically and/or socially driven. I think the only real fault we can hang on Grant is that he didn't have a tight enough grip on his subordinates -- the ones who were actually to blame for corruption or any other failures regarding the environment, etc. Environmental assessments made today are obviously presentist in nature, as the country was still caught up in the wake of the Civil War and priority was given to not only reconstruction but to building a country where citizens had a chance to prosper. As I said before, there is one assessment, Waugh's, of Grant regarding the environment. This opens the door to a balancing statement if there are any, and it seems there are. I haven't researched that topic much, so let's see what we can come up with. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree Gwillhickers that Grant held onto or trusted his subordinates to a fault...but Presidents by their nature are protective of their appointees because quickly getting rid of subordinates would be an admittance of fault in selecting them as appointments and additionally no one would want to serve a President knowing they could get removed without notice...That indeed was Grant's real fault...he was always suspicious of reformers and too trusting of his suborniates caught in scandal...His cabinet was extremely underpaid only $8,000 a year, not enough to live in Washington D.C. during the Gilded Age...and I believe this is why they were prone to steal or take advantage of rings that brought them money to support their wives and families... Cmguy777 (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Special thanks[edit]

Team Barnstar Hires.png The Teamwork Barnstar
Ulysses Grant 1870-1880.jpg
Congratulations to Coemgenus and Cmguy777 for their extended and arduous efforts in bringing the Ulysses S. Grant biography to Featured Article status.
Gwillhickers (talk) 20:09, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

president and slavery
Thank you for your interest in the "Founders of the United States" and "all U.S. Presidential biographical articles", for quality articles such as Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant and Thomas Jefferson and slavery, beginning here with improvement of George Washington and slavery, for collaboration and trying to "work out any disagreements and to find consensus", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks Gerda Arendt ! I appreciate that gem award ! All of the above article are important to me and I believe better understanding of the Founders and Presidents leads to greater appreciation for them... Cmguy777 (talk) 13:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)