On saying please summary

Essay writing Service, on, saying, please

I appreciate User:TheVirginiahistorian is trying to build the best online encyclopedia. He has my best wishes and my assistance if he requests. However, for a subject as extremely well researched and covered as re lee, wikipedians must rely on what the best historians have said. For the wikipedia article to put forth the (imho fringe, however "true assertion made in this RfC, we'd need substantial backing in multiple reliable secondary sources. We cannot for ourselves assert the subject's intentions or feelings based on primary sources. That's not our function; that's the definition of original research. When scholarly research on a subject occupies such a vast body of work, we can't jump to conclusions based on a nyt article's assertions either. We are required to use the consensus of the best authorities, even for minority view assertions.

I agree with Gwillhickers that it should be stated as "he wrote." Elmmapleoakpine ( talk ) 00:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC) Oppose edit Oppose, the passage because it isn't carefully reported wp:primary sources, it is wp:original research, - or alternatively, it is wp:undue because wikipedia. 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC) Oppose - this is original researched based on primary sources. It would be a lot better if a historian has analysed these letters and offered an interpretation. In any case, the language used appears to be editorialising, such as stating, in the wikipedia's voice:.unlawful violent action by Abolitionists whether in civil war or servile insurrection. This content is not suitable for inclusion in the present form. Ffman ( talk ) 01:53, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Oppose as proposed, this would first need reliable, independent sources explaining its significance. This also includes inappropriately emotive language which should be more clearly attributed to a specific statement at a specific time. For example, instead of saying he "believed" it to be a moral evil, he "described it as" a moral evil. Likewise, when, exactly, did he "hope for." these things? This would have to be rephrased according to independent sources, with appropriate context provided by those sources, not wikipedia editors. Grayfell ( talk ) 02:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Oppose.

on saying please summary

Essay - 542 Words

Suggest place it near the letter to his wife. I'll also suggest the whole section seems a bit undue - what historians said or he wrote about his feelings simply was not a big part of his life events or impact and is save described as not done much about - but this text seems. (Why are they"s anyway? Makes it look like synth edits.) Markbassett ( talk ) 05:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC) Support (V. Conditional) the amount of text seems excessive and could be reduced to a sentence or two - possibly alongside the 'wife' letter. I also endorse the comments made by markbassett and Gwillhickers about inapt phrasing. Pincrete ( talk ) 15:29, 17 December 2017 (UTC) Support inclusion of passage. Personal correspondence to a family member provides insight into the views of a historical figure.

on saying please summary

A g gardiner essays

Instead of saying "But lee hoped for. we instead should say "lee wrote that. adding no further opinion of our own, which tvh hasn't done here. Using primary sources: Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in wikipedia, but only with care. There is no Original Research here because the proposal doesn't advance any unusual or radical idea. Lee's memoirs have been reputably published by numerous publishers over the years, are widely recognized by historians, as are jefferson's and reviews Grant's memoirs. As controversial issues go, it's important to be clear about all perspectives for the readers. gwillhickers ( talk ) 22:39, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Support when attributed as 'lee wrote' instead of phrased as an analysis 'lee hoped for which seems what some of the oppose editors are objecting about. I also vaguely recall other works talking to his dislike of slavery that might be good or better to use, but this would do for now.

The maximum was raised from seven to twenty some time ago, subsequently to fifty circa august 2015. The user names need not be on the same line as the signature, merely on a newly-created line; provided that the signature is also on a newly-created line (not necessarily the same one and all these lines were created in the same edit, a notification. redrose64 ( talk ) 00:40, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Sorry for saying "line" when I meant "edit". I received Redrose64's ping just now - none for the RfC. onroe iii ( talk ) 01:13, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Thanks for the assist. I'm still trying iterations, without success yet. Thanks to both though. TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 11:11, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Survey edit support edit support inclusion of passage, which is more inclusive than the previous iteration, expanding the previous two elements to eight by carefully using"s from wp:primary sources as sourced. 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC) TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 19:46, 11 December 2017 (UTC) Support (conditional) first, i would change some of the language in the above proposal.

Say, on -pay corporate securities Law Blog

on saying please summary

Remove duplicate entries from validation summary t - stack

In RfCs, the "Survey" section is normally reserved for!votes of support or oppose with their own explanation, since they are wp:notvotes, but opinions adding weight to reach consensus, not based on popularity, etc. In addition, the "Threaded discussion" section is normally for actual threaded discussions about issues in the discussion, not votes. I suggest quickly re-ordering these sections to allow for typical RfC progress. onroe iii ( talk ) 20:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC) Clarification of the survey made in accordance with wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example formatting. Explicit support and opposition to the passage in its second revision which answers the previous objections is of interest here, - as the inclusive changes embracing editor comments seem to have been ignored in discussion here at Talk. TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 07:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC) This RfC does not follow the example formatting; the example includes several uses. These each represent different editors adding separate comments, not all done at once by the single originating editor.

Please look at other complete RfCs. RfC formatting is up to the proposer, but there's a good reason for following the example formatting. As currently structured, this RfC is bound to fail. By presenting this RfC as black and white, with only "Support" or "Oppose" options with reasoning pre-selected, tends to eliminate any chance of some consensus - an agreement of ideas that may satisfy most everyone. RfCs that end with a simple majority (60 or so) in favor with no new middle-ground or compromise presented that actually resolves the issue, are almost always closed with "no consensus which yields no change to the article - the same result as everyone voting. (Also, i'm pretty sure none of those pings worked. They have to be on the same line as your signature, no more than a few at a time, homework each group with its own new signature.) - onroe iii ( talk ) 16:01, 12 December 2017 (UTC) @ onroe iii : They will have worked.

TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 19:53, 12 December 2017 (UTC) Should the lees views on race and slavery" section contain the passage with information from lees letter to his son from Texas and Congressional hearings,"d. Long as sourced, and (1) expanding the elements of lees belief reported in the article and (2) replacing the block" partially mirroring the letter with text written in an encyclopedic style? TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC) In an 1856 letter from Texas to his son from his Texas frontier post, lee described slavery to be an institution of what he called a moral and political evil, detrimental to both slave and master. But he acceded to the inevitability of slavery under the. Constitution during his own time. While lee expressed his feelings were strongly enlisted in behalf of the colored race, he expressed a greater concern for the damage being done whites under slavery.


Additionally he saw slavery as what he termed "a painful discipline for those enslaved, associating it with improving the colored race compared to its African roots cultures by Christianization during its time of captivity. 1 But lee wrote of better things for African Americans, and that with prayerful support, the "sure influence of Christianity" would bring about the final abolition of human slavery as an act of Gods doctrine on earth in what lee conceived as a miracle. Regardless of slaverys ultimate extinction as Gods "doctrine lee did not believe that an end of slavery should come at the hands of what he termed "unlawful violent action" by Abolitionists whether in civil war or servile insurrection, 2 nor did he believe the institution. From a letter of lee's from Texas to his wife dated December 27, 1856. From Congressional testimony to congress, february 25, 1868. TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC) The concrete objections to the initial proposal have been met in the updated markup to the best of my ability. All of the elements in the current text in the article are preserved, including that lee expressed a greater concern for the damage being done whites under slavery. TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 05:53, (UTC) point of order.

Say you won't go blake

Lee of essay a proposed restatement of a wp:primary source which is contains more points than the existing block" from the letter. The primary source is a 1856 letter of lees to his son from Texas as found at Long,. L., memoirs of Robert. Lee: his military and personal history (1886. Opponents have seen wp:original research in the proposal as drawing conclusions not found in the primary source. TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 20:45, 17 December 2017 (UTC) TheVirginiahistorian ( talk ) 10:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Additionally, @ Shadowfax0 @ Alexandre8 @ Bilsonius @ Johnlumea @ Kelvan. F @ Genkineko @ deisenbe @ onroe iii @ Gwillhickers @ Rjensen @ Infrogmation.

on saying please summary

It was the basic moral of his religion that showed that slavery was not a sustainable attribute as America grew past these futile times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ( talk ) 08:39, (utc rfC about the use of wp:primary sources and the proposed passage edit The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary presentation of the conclusions reached follows. Clear consensus against inclusion, due to concerns about original research and a desire for the use of secondary sources for contextualization and determining due weight. Galobtter ( pingó mió ) 12:20, (UTC) Talk page contributors: @ Smmurphy, dimadick, snooganssnoogans, theVirginiahistorian, moxy, daniel Case, gedcke, iac-62, neutrality,. K, anythingyouwant, elonka, princewilliam3, and Darthkenobi0. You are receiving this notice for an RfC at Talk:Robert.

not correct that Robert. Lee spent the majority of his time in northern or border states. His first assignment out of the military academy was in savannah, ga where he helped coordinate the construction of forts for many years. Also he was stationed in la for long periods of time fighting in the mexican-American War. This should be changed as you used the fact that he did not live in far southern state so he could not relate the real slavery. Actually virginia his home state was large in plantation cropping and slavery. His domain of living did not have any outlook on his view on slavery.

State of, virginia on wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list paper of open tasks. B, this article has been rated. B-class on the project's quality scale. Top, this article has been rated. Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope. Wikiproject Homeschooling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of homeschooling -related topics on wikipedia. Low, this article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary, and cast - wattpad

Lee was a, history good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also essay seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Current status: Former good article nominee, this article is of interest to the following. Wikiprojects : This article is within the scope. Wikiproject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the.


on saying please summary
All products 44 Artikelen
when we are adding potentially libelous statements, like on Jenny McCarthy. EvergreenFir (talk) Please re 18:00, (UTC). own spin on it saying see, this not that critical, it is mildly critical, we should take this as praise, hey that too is praise and.

4 Comment

  1. secondary sources saying the same thing in order to gain a wide consensus, - but the follow- on proposal with reliable scholarly. Please understand i am not saying it has to be word for word the same as on the back of the dvd/vhs boxes. Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.

  2. the plot summary for a work, on a page about that work, does not need to be sourced with in-line citations, as it is generally assumed. of plot summary on a highly acclaimed book that could and should have a well balanced article on it, the conclusion of the afd could. Will you please pass my thanks on to her? was planning on opening with a word document and is instead opening with the help of the.

  3. Wuerzele reverted the reversion saying no reason for deletion given- fleetham please discuss on talk page. If you are saying that the serial comma is de rigueur on, wikipedia, please take it up on the talk page of the wp:mos, not here. an edit summary saying the reason was given before, that makes it seem like you are referring to the edit of mozillar, and sound like. to a duplication of content on just the basis of saying that should be rather than showing a point to it being in this article.

  4. Was still on the park map ( saying that its an error isn't valid because the same point applies to the website).-Dom497 (talk) 13:58,. s plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed. Please help improve it by removing unnecessary details and making it more. never commenting on the content dispute, but your edit summary is always moaning about something vague that i allegedly did or didnt.

Leave a reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.


*