This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This discussion was about an article on a Thomas Pickering that turned out to be based on a misprint of Timothy Pickering's name.
If anyone cares: I'm not an expert in American history so I don't. But Google search shows at least dozens of hits although some of them refer to the biography directories. Clearly not a ProD or speedy deletion case. I'd let the importance tag stay waiting for the experts. -- Futurano 20:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Does wiki have a codified policy for the order of offices held by an individual in an infobox? I've noticed some inconsistency in this area -- some pages listed the most recent office held at the top of the infobox, other pages the oldest post. Is there a standard to follow? twinsrulemlb ( talk) 0:08, 28 Oct 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Timothy Pickering. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
The language of the article alleges that the subject violated the Logan Act. Now, visit the Logan Act page & behold no one has ever been convicted of violating that statute; only two persons have ever been charged with it and Tim Pickering was none of them. SO his innocence or guilt of the charge has never been officially decided (yet evidently the man did act in a manner that would seem to warrant a conviction). Is it "kosher" for the internet encyclopedist to pronounce final judgment in the matter? Samuel Enderby ( talk) 02:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This discussion was about an article on a Thomas Pickering that turned out to be based on a misprint of Timothy Pickering's name.
If anyone cares: I'm not an expert in American history so I don't. But Google search shows at least dozens of hits although some of them refer to the biography directories. Clearly not a ProD or speedy deletion case. I'd let the importance tag stay waiting for the experts. -- Futurano 20:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Does wiki have a codified policy for the order of offices held by an individual in an infobox? I've noticed some inconsistency in this area -- some pages listed the most recent office held at the top of the infobox, other pages the oldest post. Is there a standard to follow? twinsrulemlb ( talk) 0:08, 28 Oct 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Timothy Pickering. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
The language of the article alleges that the subject violated the Logan Act. Now, visit the Logan Act page & behold no one has ever been convicted of violating that statute; only two persons have ever been charged with it and Tim Pickering was none of them. SO his innocence or guilt of the charge has never been officially decided (yet evidently the man did act in a manner that would seem to warrant a conviction). Is it "kosher" for the internet encyclopedist to pronounce final judgment in the matter? Samuel Enderby ( talk) 02:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)