![]() | Lower Shawneetown was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 10, 2022). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lower Shawneetown. 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) 00:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed a new link arriving from here to Lower Shawneetown Archeological District, an extremely short article that i created long ago, without much info. The exact location/area of the archeological district is not publicly available, but it is presumably in Lower Shawneetown. Hey, it seems to me that it would probably better for that article to be merged to a short section here, or to some location here. If someone would like to implement that, I say go ahead! I wouldn't mind being pinged or otherwise notified. Or discuss? -- Doncram ( talk) 00:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
This image currently in the article is misidentified. It's actually this image, depicting a scene from 1764 in Pontiac's War. That's a British soldier in the hat, not French. Kevin1776 ( talk) 00:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hale and Wheeler-Voegelin give differing explanations for the town's abandonment. Without seeing Wheeler-Voegelin's text, which I have no access to, I am assuming that she bases her theory entirely on Croghan's statement that "during the French war, they abandoned [the town] for fear of the Virginians, and removed to the plains on Scioto." I would be interested to know if she provides any reason why she thinks Hale was mistaken in his statement that the town was destroyed by floods.
In examining the two statements, I'd like to point out that the town was destroyed by flooding in 1753, so it seems likely that the river might flood again in 1758. On the other hand, a raid from Virginia seems less likely, given that the Virginians had not been raiding Native American communities in the Ohio Valley. The only significant raid on an Indian community during the previous years had been the Raid on Kittanning in 1756, which was executed by a Pennsylvania militia with great difficulty and only moderate success. A town the size of Lower Shawneetown (1200 to 1500 population, with perhaps 400 warriors) would have been a more ambitious target than Kittanning requiring a sizeable military expedition to travel several hundred miles. Croghan of course knew the Shawnees at Lower Shawneetown very well and his statement can't be refuted, but as he offers no other details, I believe that flooding seems to be a more probable explanation for the move. Cmacauley ( talk) 18:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the correction. I can see that Hale was clearly mistaken, as other sources confirm that there was no town there in 1763 to 1765. I've made an edit to correspond with this. Cmacauley ( talk) 23:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Mike Christie ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Images are appropriately tagged.
I'm going to pause there, before reviewing the text, since if many of these have to be removed it might change the article. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Cmacauley, just a note to say I've struck some points above. I see you've left some of the sources in that I questioned above -- can you say why you think those are reliable? Or do you plan to remove them? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Everything above is struck; thanks for taking care of those. The sources added are reliable, and Earwig finds no issues.
More later. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Continuing:
Spotchecks:
I'm reluctantly going to fail this. The number of sourcing questions means all the sources should be gone through and re-verified, and that's more than should be done at GAN. I think at least two or three quotes need to be removed, which will require some new text to review, and there's a list of further issues to address above. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | Lower Shawneetown was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 10, 2022). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lower Shawneetown. 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) 00:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed a new link arriving from here to Lower Shawneetown Archeological District, an extremely short article that i created long ago, without much info. The exact location/area of the archeological district is not publicly available, but it is presumably in Lower Shawneetown. Hey, it seems to me that it would probably better for that article to be merged to a short section here, or to some location here. If someone would like to implement that, I say go ahead! I wouldn't mind being pinged or otherwise notified. Or discuss? -- Doncram ( talk) 00:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
This image currently in the article is misidentified. It's actually this image, depicting a scene from 1764 in Pontiac's War. That's a British soldier in the hat, not French. Kevin1776 ( talk) 00:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hale and Wheeler-Voegelin give differing explanations for the town's abandonment. Without seeing Wheeler-Voegelin's text, which I have no access to, I am assuming that she bases her theory entirely on Croghan's statement that "during the French war, they abandoned [the town] for fear of the Virginians, and removed to the plains on Scioto." I would be interested to know if she provides any reason why she thinks Hale was mistaken in his statement that the town was destroyed by floods.
In examining the two statements, I'd like to point out that the town was destroyed by flooding in 1753, so it seems likely that the river might flood again in 1758. On the other hand, a raid from Virginia seems less likely, given that the Virginians had not been raiding Native American communities in the Ohio Valley. The only significant raid on an Indian community during the previous years had been the Raid on Kittanning in 1756, which was executed by a Pennsylvania militia with great difficulty and only moderate success. A town the size of Lower Shawneetown (1200 to 1500 population, with perhaps 400 warriors) would have been a more ambitious target than Kittanning requiring a sizeable military expedition to travel several hundred miles. Croghan of course knew the Shawnees at Lower Shawneetown very well and his statement can't be refuted, but as he offers no other details, I believe that flooding seems to be a more probable explanation for the move. Cmacauley ( talk) 18:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the correction. I can see that Hale was clearly mistaken, as other sources confirm that there was no town there in 1763 to 1765. I've made an edit to correspond with this. Cmacauley ( talk) 23:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Mike Christie ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Images are appropriately tagged.
I'm going to pause there, before reviewing the text, since if many of these have to be removed it might change the article. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Cmacauley, just a note to say I've struck some points above. I see you've left some of the sources in that I questioned above -- can you say why you think those are reliable? Or do you plan to remove them? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Everything above is struck; thanks for taking care of those. The sources added are reliable, and Earwig finds no issues.
More later. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Continuing:
Spotchecks:
I'm reluctantly going to fail this. The number of sourcing questions means all the sources should be gone through and re-verified, and that's more than should be done at GAN. I think at least two or three quotes need to be removed, which will require some new text to review, and there's a list of further issues to address above. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)