Talk:Frank Stanford

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Poetry Low‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry 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.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cleanup

This article uses a lot of non-nuetral language such as "sadly", "even worse," "skipped over," "helpfully." It needs to be cleaned up. Sources needed as well.--Lendorien 20:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jeanenawhitney using AWB on this and scores of other Wiki pages apparently unknowingly deleted important information on Frank Stanford first revealed in the research around this entry; therefore, user's automated AWB edits were reverted.Ozarkhighlands (talk) 01:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"highly lexical"

... Isn't poetry intrinsically lexical?

70.55.53.41 (talk) 23:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Submit for peer review and GA status?

This is a really good article now. I'm not sure what the method of submitting it for review is, but it should be. Thanks to the editor who spent so much work on it. --Lendorien (talk) 19:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 48

The author of footnote 48 tries to reconcile (by stating one source to be a "misprint") sources that state the suicide weapon to have been a "pistol" with a source that states it to have been a "revolver", as if those two statements were contradictory. For most English-speakers, they are not. For most English-speakers, "pistol" and "handgun" are synonyms, and so a "revolver" IS a "pistol". To believe that there is a contradiction one must believe that the sources stating the weapon to have been a "pistol" are using the phrase "a pistol" in a way that is true of only SOME (but not most) English-speakers: as the equivalent of "an automatic". Unless some REASON is given for believing that the sources that say "pistol" are within this minority of English-speakers to whom "pistol" means "multi-shot but non-revolver", there is no reason to believe that they are stating the weapon NOT to have been a revolver. Ergo, they don't disagree with sources that say it WAS a revolver.69.86.239.244 (talk) 03:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Stanford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to https://www.coppercanyonpress.org/pages/browse/book.asp?bg=
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110508224754/http://lostroadspublishers.org:80/?p=70 to http://lostroadspublishers.org/?p=70

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Frank Stanford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More cleanup

Somebody put a lot of love into this but also a bunch of original research and editorializing that has no place in WP. I did a bunch of cleanup in these diffs. This follows a query by User:Rockypedia at WT:RS here Jytdog (talk) 16:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]