Talk:Texas Revolution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured articleTexas Revolution is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 25, 2015.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 25, 2015Peer reviewReviewed
April 18, 2015Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Quality of Language Lacking[edit]

I believe that the writing style of this page suffers from quality issues. Consider: "The new Texas government and army met their doom...": met their doom?

Consider the following:

"What is significant is a Spanish royalist lieutenant named Antonio López de Santa Anna fought in this battle and followed his superiors' orders to take no prisoners. Another interesting note is two founding fathers of the Republic of Texas and future signers of the Texas Declaration of Independence in 1836, José Antonio Navarro and José Francisco Ruiz, took part in the Gutiérrez–Magee Expedition"

"What is significant" and "Another interesting note"? ... not a good way to introduce a new statement or idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beaudoin (talkcontribs) 16:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

"After the Alamo"??[edit]

Why is this book by a racist who isn't a historian quoted all over the page? Seriously what the fuck, "Republic of Texas Press", a pay-to-print scam publisher?

This needs discussion. I looked for the author on Amazon and he is not a historian, has no academic position or degree in history; most of his other books are "biographies" reviewed as highly inaccurate and sensationalized. The publishing imprint appears to have had low standards for truthfulness and fact checking, publishing books like "spirits of the alamo" claiming that the site is haunted and "ghosts of north texas". I do not see how this book qualifies as a reliable source under guidelines.

There are three books cited from Republic of Texas Press, which is an imprint of the publisher Rowman & Littlefield, and that is certainly not pay-to-print. The one mentioned is only cited once, the two others are more extensively so. It's not an academic press and I can't say the qualifications of its authors - but a serious concern is being raised. It's not clear which author you are particularly criticizing.--Pharos (talk) 05:54, 31 October 2018 (UTC)