This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lawrence Sullivan Ross article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Lawrence Sullivan Ross is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 22, 2009. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former featured article |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I attend Texas A&M (where we have a large statue of "Sully" as he is called in front of the Academic Building) and there has been talk of him being a member of, and even a leader of, the KKK while in Texas. Can anyone substantiate this? JRDarby 05:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I've been reading Judith Benner's biography of Sully, and it doesn't mention any KKK leanings. She quotes a lot from Ross's private letters, which means she should have had access to all the facts that are still recordable. Overall, the tone of the book is very favorable to Sully though. Karanacs 15:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Sealtexas.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
{{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}}
along with the required parameters to the article - see
Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.
[?]More to follow later. — BQZip01 — talk 06:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I have read (sorry, can't find the ref) that contrary to "our" eurocentric view, many women were happier in indian communities then in white communities, at least for pre revolutionary New england. Perhaps this is 1960s mythology; perhaps not. In any event, the "rescue" sounds a little suspicious - based on those stereotypes of hte bad savages and the enlightened whiteman. 65.220.64.105 ( talk) 13:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
In the section titled "Legacy," one paragraph is devoted to the statue of Ross on the Texas A&M campus. The first half of that paragraph is about the statue itself. However, the second half of the paragraph is a tangent relating to the recent "tradition" of students placing pennies at the foot of the statue to ensure good luck during final exams. (I place the word "tradition" in quotes, because it is so recent that it was not observed when I was a student in the late 1960s and early 1970s.) This tangent contains three sentences. The first of these simply states what this tradition is. The second sentence attributes the tradition to a campus legend, which states that Ross, during his presidency at the college, often tutored students, "and as payment would accept only a penny for their thoughts." This makes no sense for several reasons. First, the term "a penny for your thoughts," means that the person speaking will pay "a penny for your thoughts." It does not mean that the person speaking will take "a penny for your thoughts." Second, the payment that is referenced in the campus legend is payment for tutoring, not for anyone's thoughts. This reference in the article would make more sense if it stated that Ross accepted "only a penny for tutoring." Third, if this legend were true, then the tradition would have started as soon after the statue's erection, and it would have been started by students who remembered paying Ross a penny for tutoring. But we know that the tradition did not start until sometime in the mid-1970s at the earliest, and probably after that, by students who were born sixty-plus years after Ross died. The third sentence in this tangent states that "at exam time, his statue ... is often covered in pennies." This statement is untrue on the face of it. It is a greatly exaggerated figure of speech. Finally, the source of this tangent, listed in the endnote, is an article that appeared in the campus newspaper in 2004. The source quoted in the 2004 newspaper article is a member of the Class of 2006 who does not give a source for his/her statement, but says that the tradition started during the life of Ross. For that to have been true, the statue would have to been completed before Ross died. My recommendation is that this entire three-sentence tangent, which is not about Ross, but about about a statue of him, be removed from this article on "Lawrence Sullivan Ross." PGNormand ( talk) 19:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lawrence Sullivan Ross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lawrence Sullivan Ross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Overall, this one is looking like it is in pretty good shape, and I've performed a bit of cleanup. However, I do have a few notes:
Marking this one as satisfactory with notes at WP:URFA/2020, the ongoing FA sweeps. Hog Farm Talk 05:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
How was this article promoted to featured when a large majority of the citations are to a single work (Benner's 1983 biography), one that is clearly outdated and heavily slanted? Per a review by the Texas A&M University historian Robert Calvert, Benner's biography "denies" widely accepted views of Ross, is "uncritical" of him, displays "unqualified enthusiasm for Ross", and is of little interest to scholars. "Many historians of Texas will not find her thesis persuasive. Her staunch defense of Ross's every action will cause most readers to be wary of accepting her conclusions" ( here's a URL to the review). Another review says "her admiration for Ross is too evident" and you'd wonder if "this hero" is "too good to be true". ( see here) And yet 75% of this article is based on her conclusions! And it's a FEATURED article!! How is this acceptable? Dylanvt ( talk) 23:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Aquabluetesla: If you are contending that Benner is not a reliable source (as are others), it is incumbent upon you to explain why and discuss how to include/exclude such material, not just remove it from WP. To do so is inherently disruptive. One person's critique is not sufficient. Buffs ( talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
"When Parker mentioned his kidnapped niece had been named Cynthia Ann Parker, the woman slapped her chest and said 'Me Cincee Ann.'" is untrue and manufactured history.Then it is incumbent upon you to demonstrate as such. Multiple published authors in reliable sources state otherwise. Merely saying "THIS IS FALSE!" is not sufficient justification to remove it.
You have also added sources without reading what is written in themis both incorrect and an assumption without any foundation. In fact, you quote all the sources and they all show the same quoted phrase. Yes, one was a different printing of the same book (which was kinda my point). I also gave you the option to pick a different source more to your liking and your reaction was to blank it. This too is inappropriate.
If you would like to have this demeaning misquote in the article...I see nothing "demeaning" about quoting historical facts. You seem to think all of these sources relay the situation differently, but the same basic facts happened.
the authors are parroting the quote written by Bennerassumes facts not in evidence.
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lawrence Sullivan Ross article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Lawrence Sullivan Ross is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 22, 2009. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former featured article |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I attend Texas A&M (where we have a large statue of "Sully" as he is called in front of the Academic Building) and there has been talk of him being a member of, and even a leader of, the KKK while in Texas. Can anyone substantiate this? JRDarby 05:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I've been reading Judith Benner's biography of Sully, and it doesn't mention any KKK leanings. She quotes a lot from Ross's private letters, which means she should have had access to all the facts that are still recordable. Overall, the tone of the book is very favorable to Sully though. Karanacs 15:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Sealtexas.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
{{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}}
along with the required parameters to the article - see
Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.
[?]More to follow later. — BQZip01 — talk 06:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I have read (sorry, can't find the ref) that contrary to "our" eurocentric view, many women were happier in indian communities then in white communities, at least for pre revolutionary New england. Perhaps this is 1960s mythology; perhaps not. In any event, the "rescue" sounds a little suspicious - based on those stereotypes of hte bad savages and the enlightened whiteman. 65.220.64.105 ( talk) 13:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
In the section titled "Legacy," one paragraph is devoted to the statue of Ross on the Texas A&M campus. The first half of that paragraph is about the statue itself. However, the second half of the paragraph is a tangent relating to the recent "tradition" of students placing pennies at the foot of the statue to ensure good luck during final exams. (I place the word "tradition" in quotes, because it is so recent that it was not observed when I was a student in the late 1960s and early 1970s.) This tangent contains three sentences. The first of these simply states what this tradition is. The second sentence attributes the tradition to a campus legend, which states that Ross, during his presidency at the college, often tutored students, "and as payment would accept only a penny for their thoughts." This makes no sense for several reasons. First, the term "a penny for your thoughts," means that the person speaking will pay "a penny for your thoughts." It does not mean that the person speaking will take "a penny for your thoughts." Second, the payment that is referenced in the campus legend is payment for tutoring, not for anyone's thoughts. This reference in the article would make more sense if it stated that Ross accepted "only a penny for tutoring." Third, if this legend were true, then the tradition would have started as soon after the statue's erection, and it would have been started by students who remembered paying Ross a penny for tutoring. But we know that the tradition did not start until sometime in the mid-1970s at the earliest, and probably after that, by students who were born sixty-plus years after Ross died. The third sentence in this tangent states that "at exam time, his statue ... is often covered in pennies." This statement is untrue on the face of it. It is a greatly exaggerated figure of speech. Finally, the source of this tangent, listed in the endnote, is an article that appeared in the campus newspaper in 2004. The source quoted in the 2004 newspaper article is a member of the Class of 2006 who does not give a source for his/her statement, but says that the tradition started during the life of Ross. For that to have been true, the statue would have to been completed before Ross died. My recommendation is that this entire three-sentence tangent, which is not about Ross, but about about a statue of him, be removed from this article on "Lawrence Sullivan Ross." PGNormand ( talk) 19:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lawrence Sullivan Ross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lawrence Sullivan Ross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Overall, this one is looking like it is in pretty good shape, and I've performed a bit of cleanup. However, I do have a few notes:
Marking this one as satisfactory with notes at WP:URFA/2020, the ongoing FA sweeps. Hog Farm Talk 05:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
How was this article promoted to featured when a large majority of the citations are to a single work (Benner's 1983 biography), one that is clearly outdated and heavily slanted? Per a review by the Texas A&M University historian Robert Calvert, Benner's biography "denies" widely accepted views of Ross, is "uncritical" of him, displays "unqualified enthusiasm for Ross", and is of little interest to scholars. "Many historians of Texas will not find her thesis persuasive. Her staunch defense of Ross's every action will cause most readers to be wary of accepting her conclusions" ( here's a URL to the review). Another review says "her admiration for Ross is too evident" and you'd wonder if "this hero" is "too good to be true". ( see here) And yet 75% of this article is based on her conclusions! And it's a FEATURED article!! How is this acceptable? Dylanvt ( talk) 23:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Aquabluetesla: If you are contending that Benner is not a reliable source (as are others), it is incumbent upon you to explain why and discuss how to include/exclude such material, not just remove it from WP. To do so is inherently disruptive. One person's critique is not sufficient. Buffs ( talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
"When Parker mentioned his kidnapped niece had been named Cynthia Ann Parker, the woman slapped her chest and said 'Me Cincee Ann.'" is untrue and manufactured history.Then it is incumbent upon you to demonstrate as such. Multiple published authors in reliable sources state otherwise. Merely saying "THIS IS FALSE!" is not sufficient justification to remove it.
You have also added sources without reading what is written in themis both incorrect and an assumption without any foundation. In fact, you quote all the sources and they all show the same quoted phrase. Yes, one was a different printing of the same book (which was kinda my point). I also gave you the option to pick a different source more to your liking and your reaction was to blank it. This too is inappropriate.
If you would like to have this demeaning misquote in the article...I see nothing "demeaning" about quoting historical facts. You seem to think all of these sources relay the situation differently, but the same basic facts happened.
the authors are parroting the quote written by Bennerassumes facts not in evidence.