Talk:Huey Long

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

Assessed C?[edit]

How come this is assessed as a C-quality article? The bio seems very well rounded, legacy and fiction chapters somewhat repetitious and thinly referenced, but still, it's not too bad at all. Thoughts? BTW, thanks to writers. trespassers william (talk) 23:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it's very well written. Out of the six criteria for B-quality, the article probably satisfies #2-6 but not yet #1 (sufficient inline citations). —Patrug (talk) 21:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
'exhaustive ' series of campaign visits? Meaning he visited absolutely every possible place? Or is 'wearying' 'exhausting' meant? FWIW, I don't think the article is especially well-written. (talk) 08:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Partially inspired by Italian Fascism[edit]

The article says "A Democrat, he was an outspoken populist, partially inspired by sansepolcrista Italian fascism." Is there any source that he was partially inspired by sansepolcrista Italian fascism? If not, I suggest to remove that part of the sentence.-- (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Huey Long. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

bullets and historians[edit]

Why do historians not accept the hypothesis that Long was killed by his bodyguards given the fact that he was killed by a .38 and his supposed assassin was armed with a .22? Did Long's supposed assassin wrestle a gun from one of the guards? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8101:2900:65F8:2E2B:4F8:62FD (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

There have been many various conspiracy theories, and various ideas regarding the evidence. A lot of evidence has been lost, or wasn’t collected properly. The reported bullet sizes have varied from one caliber to another. The actual bullet was not preserved, and is not part of any forensic evidence. Bullets have turned up and been tested but then rejected. There were seven witnesses who were near the assassination when it happened, and their descriptions are well recorded. Boinkster (talk) 17:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Sam Irby[edit]

I recently came across this article and while I'm not suggesting it as a source, they have a habit of citing their own sources and standards for sourcing not too dissimilar from our own. It details a series of events involving a former employee who was supposedly kidnapped by police and/or Long's bodyguards. The article provides two sources, Kingfish: The Reign of Huey P. Long By Richard D. White, Jr., and Huey Long's Louisiana Hayride By Harnett Thomas Kane, and gives page links so it's easily verifiable in the books. Any thoughts before I add a bit about it? ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Interesting article. You could abridge the anecdote in order to fit it into the Huey Long article, which is rather concise. I'd place it at the end of the subsection "Impeachment attempt (1929)", within the last paragraph or after it, as it deals with Long's ruthlessness.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
That's pretty much what I had in mind. Just three or four sentences in either that section for context, or in the "renewed strength" section, for chronology. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
T Harry Williams in 1969 covered the story in depth pp 471-79. Irby denied to a federal judge that he had been kidnapped. His name appeared as author of a little book but the kidnapping part was written by the ghost writer and was full of grisly stories that "went beyond anything Irby had told him." ( p478) -- those fake stories are picked up by It was the ghostwriter (named Fineran) who invented stories that Irby had been manacled to a tree, devoured by mosquitoes, starved, and threatened with death. Rjensen (talk) 01:06, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a source to back up the assertion that it's fake? If it is, that certainly also warrants mention.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't doubt that the story could be fake, as is an entertainment site, not a journalism site (though they've tried to shift that in the past). But the sources the story is pulled from are both used in the article already, and there's no hint that they're not RSes. Meanwhile, I note with some curiosity that the bio by T. Harry Williams isn't used as a source in this article. It's not like it's out of print or anything. I think I'll check my library this weekend for a copy of the Williams bio, and see what he has to say. If a Pulitzer-prize winning bio contradicts a couple of less notable, later bios, then I think we should probably give the Pulitzer prize winner more weight. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
When I re-wrote part of this article a few months ago, I was on a road trip and didn't have access to Williams bio. I've been meaning to get a copy and supplant some info. It's excruciatingly detailed (a good thing), but also criticized for being a bit biased as well as a tad outdated, so there's that.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
It's stated in the sources I gave above that Irby denied being kidnapped, so that much everyone agrees on. The disconnect here seems to be that my sources state that Irby recanted the denial to little media attention after the fact, claiming he gave it under duress, whereas the Williams source, according to Rjensen, doesn't mention this. So it may well be that there's no disagreement among the sources, just addition claims by the sources I gave, above. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Williams says that Irby appeared in federal court and testified to Federal judge Borah that he voluntarily went on a fishing trip and was not kidnapped. Borah then threw out all charges against Long. Irby's ghosted book states, p 68 "The [federal] court reconvened, and I was again placed on the stand. Believing positively that I would be killed where I stood if I told the truth, I answered the questions as HUEY LONG had ordered and as WILKINSON instructed me to answer whenever I was hesitant or doubtful about the answer I should make. One question was asked for which I had been given no answer, and I did not speak, but refused to answer." Williams says Irby's book is full of falsehoods, but does not explicitly say this is one of them. Rjensen (talk) 23:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)