Talk:William Temple Hornaday

Untitled

I have moved some relevant info to William T. Hornaday Awards and removed the "Hornaday Awards" section from this article, as this article is referenced as "for mere details" under "Influence on Scouting," which is a perfectly adequate summary (there is no point duplicating this information). There is no way this is a B-class article, so I am marking the WP Scouting assessment as C-class to match the other assessments. There needs to be more verifiable information about the man to expand this article. Donlammers (talk) 15:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Donlammers, above you wrote, "There needs to be more verifiable information about the man to expand this article," and that is just exactly why I just added the further reading reference you were wondering about. The historian who wrote that book mentions Hornaday extensively, and especially establishes context for Hornaday's life and activities. I invite you and other editors to look at the book, following the sources the book cites, for further updates of this article. Then the book will switch from being further reading to being a reference for this article. I hope that if you are in the United States you are enjoying a pleasant Thanksgiving weekend. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 17:49, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

With all respect, I think you have it exactly backwards - it's your job to improve the article by citing information from the book, not to throw the book over the wall to 'Further reading' and hope that someone else buys a copy and works on the article. --CliffC (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

With all respect, I think you have misinterpreted what I was saying to the editor above (perhaps because you didn't see his edit summary on an edit to the article earlier today, as I did). The article could well use new sources. And I found one. I hope soon to do edits of article text based on the source I found. Meanwhile, it is my habit to post new sources as I find them (not expecting reliable sources to be deleted from Wikipedia articles, which have long allowed Further reading sections in the Manual of style), so that other editors who may have good library access can verify the sources and perhaps be prompted to find still other sources in libraries. Then when actual edits of article text ensue, everyone can be more confident that the edits are based on reliable sources, and all the editors can have a more nuanced sense of what would be due weight for neutral point of view in the article. P.S. I hope you enjoyed a happy Thanksgiving if you are living in the United States, as I am. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, WP has "allowed" See also sections as well. But IMHO (pardon my bluntness), both are usually cop-outs (general reference sections too, unless they are being used as the full reference for short citations). Since you read the book, if some part of it applies specifically to this article you should be able to use it (with proper page numbering) as a citation for something specific. If, on the other hand, it does not apply to the article specifically, then (IMHO) it doesn't belong in any section unless it's by or about the subject of the article. You can accomplish your stated objective above (bring a book to the attention of other editors) by listing the book in the talk section and explaining how it's relevant. Other editors can see it and comment, even go check it out of a library if they choose. As CliffC above states, it's not up to other editors to go read hundreds of pages to try figuring out what mey be relevant or to what part of the article. It's up to the editor posting the information to specify where it belongs in the article and the part of the book to which they are referring. It does look, however, like Maunus has done your work for you, so I will leave it as is. I will be expecting more information to be cited as you expand the article as stated above. When you have multiple page references to the same document it will probably make sense to move the main ref down to a References section and use short citations in the Notes section. I can help with the mechanics

when the time comes. Donlammers (talk) 14:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Politics

What were his political affiliations? 173.28.244.122 (talk) 20:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.beacon.org/productdetails.cfm?SKU=0635

  Triggered by \bbeacon\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

• Removed links to blacklisted commercial site purchase page. Fixed incorrect ISBN (one number missing). Removed blacklist hatnote now that I have fixed the issue. Don Lammers (talk) 20:12, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hornaday and BSA

So the BSA is renaming its Hornaday awards because of his non-political-correctness. I don't know the specifics, but if anyone does or can find out what he said or did that was controverisal, that would be a worthy addition to the article. -- Calion | Talk 01:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC)