User talk:MeuseArgonne
Alvin C. York
[edit]I've been noticing you have been having quite a bit of a discussion in the article on various topics. The newest section that you put in smacks of WP:OR and needs to be edited appropriately. You put in quite a bit of work in it, so I will give you a chance to modify it before I revert it in the next 24hrs, but also take note of WP:Prose. Thanks. --Hourick (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if I did not write this the way it should be, but I am new to Wikipedia. My intent is to inform readers of the research of other groups, not only that of Colonel Mastriano, who seems to have the monopoly here. Someone even changed the one link (at the bottom of the page) that mentions Dr. Nolan's work so it would take the reader to the army officer's site instead of to Dr. Nolan's article. I tried to correct it, but now it leads to the SCIAA article. If someone could restore the original link that would be great. --MeuseArgonne (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I have no problem with alternate views on topics, but my only concern is the accuracy and the independent verification and access to information provided. If you're not certain on how the structure in Wikipedia is, then I highly recommend you peruse various articles to see the format and methods used. While I have no problem with your research in this area, it does have to be independently published; preferably by a new source, a well known research website, or a trusted website of some sort. As an FYI, I'm going to copy and paste this convo onto the Sgt. York article so other people can chime in. --Hourick (talk) 02:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I hope I have elaborated why things need to be done slowly as far as edits such as yours are done. Please be patient, this piece of history is over 80 yrs old and the article has been fairly stable since it's creation. Think of it as how Galileo felt when his alternative views were done. It can be maddening, but it will be worth it. --Hourick (talk) 22:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Photos/images
[edit]Do you remember what file name you gave them? I found a few, but I doubt they are yours:
I think it was called either: Buxton Map.b or: Buxton Map.c
I added all of the information about the map and a general description when I posted it to the Commons. If we can get this up there I can add another that shows this information superimposed onto one of Dr. Nolan's topographical maps of the modern landscape found in his dissertation. I have done this myself with the modern French topographical map, but I think there would be a copyright issue to the French IGN.
I am not sure how to show the Graves Registration information as it is many pages long. But, Dr. Nolan has a map that depicts where these graves plot on the modern landscape. I can provide that as well.
Unfortunately the SYDE's web site no longer contains their report in English, but the French version is still up. I can copy a map from it or use a saved version of the old report to demonstrate where the SYDE says the action occurred vs. where Dr. Nolan says it occurred.
At a minimum there should be a way to show on the 1918 Buxton/Danforth map where Nolan and Mastriano sites are in relationship to what both Buxton and Danforth annotated on the map. That way the readers can make some determination for themselves on why the groups choose their sites respectively.
I will probably need to provide the text from the Buxton/Danforth letters so readers can understand what the numbers and other marking written by Buxton and Danforth mean or say. Really you need to see the high resolution scans in order to blow them up and see fainter or smaller text the two officers annotated on the map that depict everything that occurred with the 2nd Battalion 328th Infantry attack that morning including the details about the York action.
I though best get this map up first and then I can add or submit to the editors the text that I think should accompany the map. As far as showing the other things I mentioned, I await your guidance and recommendations.--MeuseArgonne (talk) 19:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
As long as the information is online, that would suffice when it comes to referencing it. There has been links to documents that are huge, but as long as it can be found, it's legit. But I do highly suggest that you familiarize yourself with wikipedia's other articles to see how the formats and such are done. I tried looking up the files you have uploaded under your user name and found the picture to the right:
From what I see of the image, it will be difficult to see where it is relative to where the site is supposedly is. Perhaps you should look at Battle of the Bulge, Battle of Britain, or something along those lines for a little perspective for the layout. Note how their maps contain original as well as newly rendered vesions.--Hourick (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
I just posted more maps to the commons. Please let me know what we can use. I have many more, but want to stick to what is really relevant in something that readers can hopefully understand. I can provide scans of the original archival documents that support these maps or WORD doc – text only. All will have archival citation of where they can be found.
I added a SYDE map from the French language report that is still available on their web site, but evidently I did not have a satisfactory copyright justification so I received a message that said it will be deleted in 7 days. I am quoting a man’s work who probably does not want his work to be viewed here, at least in an addition from me, so I ask you r help or guidance of how we can include his research in this as well. It is only fair to include what he has to say.
Here are the maps I posted tonight:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nolan_Dissertation_Page_113_-_Artifact_Distribution_Map.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nolan_Dissertation_Page_115_-_Overview_Map.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SYDE_Report_Page_29_-_Patrol_Route.jpg
In addition I would like to include some 1919 US Army Signal Corps photos of the graves of the soldiers killed in this fight and a modern view if the same locations, which is where DR. Nolan conducted his research. Is this acceptable?--MeuseArgonne (talk) 22:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)