Jump to content

Talk:James Longstreet: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Adding headers.
Line 86: Line 86:


Their editor's latest edit reverting this material is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Longstreet&diff=prev&oldid=1239380285 here]. This information is obviously relevant, and the source -- which was written by an academic historian and which won the [https://www.battlefields.org/news/historian-elizabeth-varons-longstreet-biography-wins-inaugural-american-battlefield-trust American Battlefield Trust Prize for History], is clearly an [[WP:RS]]. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 05:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Their editor's latest edit reverting this material is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Longstreet&diff=prev&oldid=1239380285 here]. This information is obviously relevant, and the source -- which was written by an academic historian and which won the [https://www.battlefields.org/news/historian-elizabeth-varons-longstreet-biography-wins-inaugural-american-battlefield-trust American Battlefield Trust Prize for History], is clearly an [[WP:RS]]. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 05:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

== Retaining existing styles ==

Per [[MOS:STYLEVAR]] – ''When either of two styles is acceptable it is generally considered inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. Unjustified changes from one acceptable, [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Consistency within articles|consistently applied]] style in an article to a different style may generally be [[Wikipedia:Reverting|reverted]]. If you believe an alternative style would be more appropriate for a particular article, seek [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] by discussing this at the article's talk page''. {{pb}}
I'm not seeing any edit summary explaining why the Notes/References/Further reading sections [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Longstreet&oldid=1239063143#References were changed]. I don't see any discussion on the talk page either where consensus was achieved for changing the established style. In absence of any compelling reason given for why the established style was changed, those changes were inappropriate and should be reverted back to the consensus version '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Longstreet&oldid=1236706937#Notes seen here]'''.[[User:Isaidnoway|<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> ''Isaidnoway'' </b>]][[User talk:Isaidnoway|<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">''(talk)''</b>]] 22:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:41, 10 August 2024

Featured articleJames Longstreet 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 December 11, 2021.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 1, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 14, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
October 13, 2021Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 8, 2021.
Current status: Featured article

Louisiana State Militia

In the article and Infobox, it list “Louisiana State Militia” I had previously made this hypertext to the Louisiana National Guard, but this edit was reverted, claiming that the national guard did not exist then.

The state militia forces were simply the name each state used to refer to what is now the national guard. And according to the Louisiana National Guard website, they trace their origin back to 1600s.

https://geauxguard.la.gov/history/ Digital Herodotus (talk) 18:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General Longstreet's early years confused with that of his nephew's?

I’m bringing up the below referenced video in the event this has not been discussed here previously. Early on in the video, there is an interview with a man with the Longstreet Society who is described as its “resident expert” concerning the general. He maintains that the early years and upbringing of General James Longstreet was confused by an early historian of the general who mistook the general’s nephew (from his older brother William), James Carter Longstreet, for General James Longstreet. He notes that his source for this is the family’s modern historian, a direct descendant of the general, who extensively researched the life of his ancestor.

I know that many Wikipedia editors are passionate about accuracy regarding all things Civil War and, therefore, for any unfamiliar with this video and interview who might want to view it and determine its validity as a source for the article, please click below. If it is deemed credible, then it would appear that the section of the article dealing with General Longstreet’s childhood might have to be revised accordingly. If any disagree, please don’t attempt to argue with me as I am hardly an expert on the subject and am just trying to be helpful for the benefit of others. I would, however, enjoy reading discussion among others here more educated than myself regarding the subject. Again, I do not know if this has been brought up here before.

Thanks to all for producing such a splendid article! It is most appreciated. For the video:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS968US968&q=james+longstreet&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiN887e0rb-AhVnFVkFHW47AUEQ0pQJegUIqAEQAQ&biw=1280&bih=578&dpr=1.25#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:900d97f1,vid:-Doop5_RKtU HistoryBuff14 (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Engineering instructor

The article talks about the tactical ideas that Longstreet learned from Dennis Hart Mahan but describes Mahan as his "engineering instructor". Did Longstreet really learn tactics in an engineering course? I'm guessing that "engineering" has crept in here because Mahan was an engineer as well as a military theorist but that the course was not an engineering course.Bill (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Billposer, the source disagrees. Display name 99 (talk) 22:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So how did tactics get into an engineering course? Bill (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Military engineering is not just building things but also maintaining lines of transportation and communication. The source, Wert, also says that Mahan devoted a week in his lessons to "the art of war," which could include the things that do not fit so neatly into engineering. What we know is that Mahan taught an engineering course and that he had theories about military conduct that Longstreet later applied. From that, Wert concludes that Longstreet was influenced by Mahan's theories. As Wert is Longstreet's premier biographer, I have incorporated his position into the article. Display name 99 (talk) 03:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well-sourced material being forcibly excluded from this article

Under the guise of objections about trivial style and format objections, an editor is attempting to prevent the following well-sourced material from being added to the article:

  • Longstreet had started buying property there in 1875 – including a farm with vineyard and orchard and a newly built hotel, which would be run by his son, Garland.[1]
  • He served briefly as deputy collector of internal revenue for Georgia and Florida, and as postmaster of Gainesville.[2]
  • Longstreet was appointed by President James Garfield as U.S. Marshal for the Northern District of Georgia, an office he held from June 1881 until he was asked to resign by Chester A. Arthur due to Republican Party factional politics. He stepped down in July 1884, but not before he vigorously defended his administration of the office to a Department of Justice committee investigating charges of corruption and malfeasance brought up by his political opponents.[3]
  • interrupted his political career – he continued to seek public office but did not succeed in doing so[4]
  • In 1897, at the age of 76, in a ceremony at the governor's mansion in Atlanta, Longstreet married 34-year-old librarian and journalist[5] Helen Dortch.
  • Longstreet is remembered in his adopted hometown of Gainesville, Georgia, {Longstreet was neither born nor grew up in Gainesville, he moved there as a adult, after living in New Orleans after the war]

Other grammatical and stylistic adjustments, which improved the writing were also rejected by thus editor, were also reverted. It is my opinion, based on their editing history, that they are expressing WP:Ownership feelings by blocking material that they did not add, based on a source they are apparently unfamiliar with (Elizabeth R. Varon (2023) Longstreet: The Confederate General Who Defied the South).

Their editor's latest edit reverting this material is here. This information is obviously relevant, and the source -- which was written by an academic historian and which won the American Battlefield Trust Prize for History, is clearly an WP:RS. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retaining existing styles

Per MOS:STYLEVARWhen either of two styles is acceptable it is generally considered inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. Unjustified changes from one acceptable, consistently applied style in an article to a different style may generally be reverted. If you believe an alternative style would be more appropriate for a particular article, seek consensus by discussing this at the article's talk page.

I'm not seeing any edit summary explaining why the Notes/References/Further reading sections were changed. I don't see any discussion on the talk page either where consensus was achieved for changing the established style. In absence of any compelling reason given for why the established style was changed, those changes were inappropriate and should be reverted back to the consensus version seen here. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Varon 2023, pp. 219–220.
  2. ^ Varon 2023, p. 243.
  3. ^ Varon 2023, pp. 264–276.
  4. ^ Varon 2023, pp. 281–203.
  5. ^ Varon 2023, p. 319.