Bill Haywood has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This seems implausible. Hall was 17 years old at the time. (He was born in 1910.) Could he already have had sufficient connections to invite a journalist to meet Haywood??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.112.148.128 ( talk) 19:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Why would those two incidents end his involvement???
-G
Shouldn't an encyclopedia article about "Big Bill" Haywood tell the reader how big Haywood was? How tall was Haywood and roughly how much did he weigh? Can a Wikipedian add this information?
-- Andrew Szanton, October 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.119.164 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 October 2006
In order of priority (in the opinion of JerryOrr):
After this to-do list is done, this article could probably be submitted for peer review, and perhaps continue on to good article or even featured article status. -- JerryOrr 19:46, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
The intro mentions,
This is flat wrong. [NOW FIXED] The Ludlow Massacre involved the UMWA, which was not Haywood's union. Haywood was not in any way involved. (In fact, he had a long-running ideological dispute with the leaders of the UMWA, for they undercut the WFM on occasion, and were much less militant. In fact, after buying rifles for the Ludlow era strikers, as a response to Baldwin Felts agents machine gunning the Forbes colony-- even during the most intense days of fighting after the Ludlow colony was burned, the UMWA held the miners in check to the extent that they were able.)
The "wars" between Colorado miners and the Colorado authorities also did not "culminate" with the Ludlow Massacre; they "culminated" with the Columbine Massacre in 1927. Yet the expression "Colorado Labor Wars" as a specific term refers most often to the bloody struggles of the WFM from approximately 1903 to 1905.
I will remove the Ludlow reference. Richard Myers 01:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I considered adding a citation for this text:
However, my quick research suggests that this information is wrong. In "The I.W.W.: Its First Seventy Years", by Fred Thompson, i find that there were six men at the November 1904 conference, all named on page 6 of that book, and none of them were Haywood. Big Bill did, however, attend the January 1905 meeting, along with 22 others.
I check Haywood's autobiography, and it does not mention a 1904 conference (other than that for the WFM,) and does mention the January conference, but states that about 30 were invited to that. So i'll plan to change these details later. But if anyone in the meantime has a source for a gathering of 30 in 1904, with Haywood in attendance, please let us hear about it so we will know to get additional confirmation. Richard Myers 04:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been on a bit of a Wikipedia hiatus, and now I see that my pet article has grown quite a bit! Thank you to everyone who has helped improve this article; I've been imploring the Organized Labour project to help out, but it was a one-man show for a long time. I eventually just ran out of steam (I'm not a professional writer, as you can probably tell). I'm glad to see this article is getting some work, because I think Bill Haywood is greatly underappreciated. I'll try to provide what input I can as you continue giving this a facelift... -- JerryOrr 13:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I've nominated this article for Good Article status. I see that as a first step before peer review, then Featured Article nomination. Just thought I'd let you all know... -- JerryOrr 22:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I like this article a lot, but I'd like to see more in-line citations, particularly in the opening paragraphs. "Never one to shy from conflict ..." ought to be cited or it could be seen as original research, for instance. Someone in one of the bios must have expressed that opinion so you can cite a page number. For a featured article, there really should be an inline citation after pretty much every sentence. If some of that can be fixed, I'll gladly pass this as a GA.-- Bookworm857158367 15:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I note that Boyce is introduced twice, with somewhat similar text. Does this seem redundant, or is it OK considering that some readers will jump in to the article at different points?
Also, the section Socialist Party of America involvement needs some attention.
This is part of the original text:
I have made a slight change, and anticipate another:
In spite of the common assumption, the IWW actually did not call for the overthrow of the government. In fact, the IWW has been criticized by Marxists and others because it has ignored government in its official statements, preamble, and constitution. This is a curious circumstance, considering that overthrowing the government would seem a necessary precondition for overthrowing capital. But that's the way it is, the idea of changing the government is implied by other announced goals but never officially stated as a goal.
The socialists who were part of the IWW for the first three years had believed that they could capture the government at the ballot box. When the workers in the IWW, disgusted with the machinations of the socialist politicians (particularly Daniel De León) during that three years, eschewed political action in the preamble and constitution at their convention in 1908, thus effectively expelling the socialists, they were determined to focus on industrial struggle rather than political struggle.
However, the IWW did specifically advocate abolition of the wage system in the preamble, and they were always anti-capitalist.
Now, all of this is complicated a bit by the fact that in his private and public pronouncements, Haywood sometimes went beyond what the IWW's official position was. He was persuaded that the Bolshevik revolution was "the IWW all feathered out!" But that was several years after he had left the socialists. So i opted to change the statement about government, rather than remove IWW from the statement and let it stand as Haywood's own view. I haven't read Siitonen, so i cannot absolutely verify the change matches the source, but i do know that the change i've made is historically accurate.
The other change that i'd like to make involves the sentence,
I don't think that is worded very accurately, nor well. But i need to think about how to fix it, and also check the given reference (if i am able.) Richard Myers 22:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to clean up some of the references/inline citations (because I know that's something they'll point out in the peer review), and I was hoping I could get some more complete information for a couple of the sources. I would appreciate it if whoever used the references listed below could fill in more of the information (publisher, ISBN, etc). Or even just tell me the ISBN of the book; if I have that, I can fill in the rest myself (I don't mind).
Also, if you know the ISBN of any book that is missing it, that improve the references.
Again, the main reason I'm picking on this is that I know it will come up either in peer review or FAC. --16:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm putting this article in for peer review, as the next step towards getting Featured Article status. Let's keep up the good work on this article! -- JerryOrr 02:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the marks of capital all over me."
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the mark of capital all over me."
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the marks of capital all over my body."
What a delicious quote, in all its variations.
Michael Smith attributes it to Haywood, here:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/May05/Smith0503.htm
Smith offers sources, but not footnotes.
It is also here:
'Who Can We Shoot?' Democratic Elitism, Marxism and American Progressivism By John F. Manley, Department of Political Science, Stanford University 1999
This essay originally appeared in the International Review of Sociology—Revue Internationale de Sociologie, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1999 (pp. 183—195)
(quoted in Lukas (1997, p. 233))
http://www.iefd.org/articles/who_can_we_shoot.php
And, it is in unattributed quote files on the web.
Ahhh, well, i think Lukas is likely to be our best source. Lukas would be:
Big Trouble: A Murder in a Small Western Town Sets Off a Struggle for the Soul of America, by J. Anthony Lukas, New York, Simon & Schuster, 875 pages, $32.50
However, i don't have that text handy. It is in nearby bookstores, and i could verify this. But does anyone else have quicker access?
Richard Myers 18:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Bill Haywood on detectives:
I have revised the last couple of paragraphs of this section. Richard Myers 19:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone ( User_talk:Malplaquet) added the entire page from this website:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/haywood/HAY_CHRO.HTM
to the Bill Haywood article. I have reverted for inappropriate content in this article, and probable violation of copyright law. Richard Myers 06:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I admit that i'm not fond of the title "Racial unity," because it doesn't describe how Haywood viewed racial unity, or why. I haven't come up with a good replacement, but something like "Haywood's belief in the unity of the working class," or "Haywood's belief in the racial unity of all workers" seem to me to capture the essence of the text better. Thoughts? Richard Myers 23:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I've requested a specific resource citation for the Boyce statement, here: User_talk:Tim1965#Ed_Boyce_resource
The original statement is in the Ed Boyce article:
I know that Jameson covered this territory — that the WFM (at least in the Cripple Creek area) had a heritage of Asian exclusion — but she doesn't tie it directly to Boyce in her book about Cripple Creek, All That Glitters.
Jerry, i like both of your suggestions about the Racial unity section title. Richard Myers 00:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Interesting to see Haywood's history promoted this way:
2007 Marks the 100th Anniversary of the “Trial of the Century”
http://www.idahohistory.net/Trial_century.pdf
Richard Myers 00:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed this edit because it was not a proper edit. I have not explored whether the info is valid:
because Tyler M. Shillings of Indiana's Senatorial staff arrived during the second half of the trial with evidence disproving the charges. Are You Going To Hang My Papa?]]
Richard Myers ( talk) 01:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
There's a great photo of Bill Haywood on Flickr here. Kaldari ( talk) 19:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review.
The article is in a good shape, but some parts could still need references, including one "citation needed" tag. The "See Also" in the "Murder trial" section is out of place, it should be incorporated into the text, put in a footnote or placed in the general "See also" section at the bottom. One picture needs a caption, if anyone can dig up any information on it, and another one is used twice. Lampman ( talk) 11:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Bill Haywood has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This seems implausible. Hall was 17 years old at the time. (He was born in 1910.) Could he already have had sufficient connections to invite a journalist to meet Haywood??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.112.148.128 ( talk) 19:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Why would those two incidents end his involvement???
-G
Shouldn't an encyclopedia article about "Big Bill" Haywood tell the reader how big Haywood was? How tall was Haywood and roughly how much did he weigh? Can a Wikipedian add this information?
-- Andrew Szanton, October 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.119.164 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 October 2006
In order of priority (in the opinion of JerryOrr):
After this to-do list is done, this article could probably be submitted for peer review, and perhaps continue on to good article or even featured article status. -- JerryOrr 19:46, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
The intro mentions,
This is flat wrong. [NOW FIXED] The Ludlow Massacre involved the UMWA, which was not Haywood's union. Haywood was not in any way involved. (In fact, he had a long-running ideological dispute with the leaders of the UMWA, for they undercut the WFM on occasion, and were much less militant. In fact, after buying rifles for the Ludlow era strikers, as a response to Baldwin Felts agents machine gunning the Forbes colony-- even during the most intense days of fighting after the Ludlow colony was burned, the UMWA held the miners in check to the extent that they were able.)
The "wars" between Colorado miners and the Colorado authorities also did not "culminate" with the Ludlow Massacre; they "culminated" with the Columbine Massacre in 1927. Yet the expression "Colorado Labor Wars" as a specific term refers most often to the bloody struggles of the WFM from approximately 1903 to 1905.
I will remove the Ludlow reference. Richard Myers 01:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I considered adding a citation for this text:
However, my quick research suggests that this information is wrong. In "The I.W.W.: Its First Seventy Years", by Fred Thompson, i find that there were six men at the November 1904 conference, all named on page 6 of that book, and none of them were Haywood. Big Bill did, however, attend the January 1905 meeting, along with 22 others.
I check Haywood's autobiography, and it does not mention a 1904 conference (other than that for the WFM,) and does mention the January conference, but states that about 30 were invited to that. So i'll plan to change these details later. But if anyone in the meantime has a source for a gathering of 30 in 1904, with Haywood in attendance, please let us hear about it so we will know to get additional confirmation. Richard Myers 04:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been on a bit of a Wikipedia hiatus, and now I see that my pet article has grown quite a bit! Thank you to everyone who has helped improve this article; I've been imploring the Organized Labour project to help out, but it was a one-man show for a long time. I eventually just ran out of steam (I'm not a professional writer, as you can probably tell). I'm glad to see this article is getting some work, because I think Bill Haywood is greatly underappreciated. I'll try to provide what input I can as you continue giving this a facelift... -- JerryOrr 13:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I've nominated this article for Good Article status. I see that as a first step before peer review, then Featured Article nomination. Just thought I'd let you all know... -- JerryOrr 22:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I like this article a lot, but I'd like to see more in-line citations, particularly in the opening paragraphs. "Never one to shy from conflict ..." ought to be cited or it could be seen as original research, for instance. Someone in one of the bios must have expressed that opinion so you can cite a page number. For a featured article, there really should be an inline citation after pretty much every sentence. If some of that can be fixed, I'll gladly pass this as a GA.-- Bookworm857158367 15:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I note that Boyce is introduced twice, with somewhat similar text. Does this seem redundant, or is it OK considering that some readers will jump in to the article at different points?
Also, the section Socialist Party of America involvement needs some attention.
This is part of the original text:
I have made a slight change, and anticipate another:
In spite of the common assumption, the IWW actually did not call for the overthrow of the government. In fact, the IWW has been criticized by Marxists and others because it has ignored government in its official statements, preamble, and constitution. This is a curious circumstance, considering that overthrowing the government would seem a necessary precondition for overthrowing capital. But that's the way it is, the idea of changing the government is implied by other announced goals but never officially stated as a goal.
The socialists who were part of the IWW for the first three years had believed that they could capture the government at the ballot box. When the workers in the IWW, disgusted with the machinations of the socialist politicians (particularly Daniel De León) during that three years, eschewed political action in the preamble and constitution at their convention in 1908, thus effectively expelling the socialists, they were determined to focus on industrial struggle rather than political struggle.
However, the IWW did specifically advocate abolition of the wage system in the preamble, and they were always anti-capitalist.
Now, all of this is complicated a bit by the fact that in his private and public pronouncements, Haywood sometimes went beyond what the IWW's official position was. He was persuaded that the Bolshevik revolution was "the IWW all feathered out!" But that was several years after he had left the socialists. So i opted to change the statement about government, rather than remove IWW from the statement and let it stand as Haywood's own view. I haven't read Siitonen, so i cannot absolutely verify the change matches the source, but i do know that the change i've made is historically accurate.
The other change that i'd like to make involves the sentence,
I don't think that is worded very accurately, nor well. But i need to think about how to fix it, and also check the given reference (if i am able.) Richard Myers 22:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to clean up some of the references/inline citations (because I know that's something they'll point out in the peer review), and I was hoping I could get some more complete information for a couple of the sources. I would appreciate it if whoever used the references listed below could fill in more of the information (publisher, ISBN, etc). Or even just tell me the ISBN of the book; if I have that, I can fill in the rest myself (I don't mind).
Also, if you know the ISBN of any book that is missing it, that improve the references.
Again, the main reason I'm picking on this is that I know it will come up either in peer review or FAC. --16:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm putting this article in for peer review, as the next step towards getting Featured Article status. Let's keep up the good work on this article! -- JerryOrr 02:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the marks of capital all over me."
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the mark of capital all over me."
"I've never read Marx's Capital, but I have the marks of capital all over my body."
What a delicious quote, in all its variations.
Michael Smith attributes it to Haywood, here:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/May05/Smith0503.htm
Smith offers sources, but not footnotes.
It is also here:
'Who Can We Shoot?' Democratic Elitism, Marxism and American Progressivism By John F. Manley, Department of Political Science, Stanford University 1999
This essay originally appeared in the International Review of Sociology—Revue Internationale de Sociologie, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1999 (pp. 183—195)
(quoted in Lukas (1997, p. 233))
http://www.iefd.org/articles/who_can_we_shoot.php
And, it is in unattributed quote files on the web.
Ahhh, well, i think Lukas is likely to be our best source. Lukas would be:
Big Trouble: A Murder in a Small Western Town Sets Off a Struggle for the Soul of America, by J. Anthony Lukas, New York, Simon & Schuster, 875 pages, $32.50
However, i don't have that text handy. It is in nearby bookstores, and i could verify this. But does anyone else have quicker access?
Richard Myers 18:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Bill Haywood on detectives:
I have revised the last couple of paragraphs of this section. Richard Myers 19:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone ( User_talk:Malplaquet) added the entire page from this website:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/haywood/HAY_CHRO.HTM
to the Bill Haywood article. I have reverted for inappropriate content in this article, and probable violation of copyright law. Richard Myers 06:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I admit that i'm not fond of the title "Racial unity," because it doesn't describe how Haywood viewed racial unity, or why. I haven't come up with a good replacement, but something like "Haywood's belief in the unity of the working class," or "Haywood's belief in the racial unity of all workers" seem to me to capture the essence of the text better. Thoughts? Richard Myers 23:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I've requested a specific resource citation for the Boyce statement, here: User_talk:Tim1965#Ed_Boyce_resource
The original statement is in the Ed Boyce article:
I know that Jameson covered this territory — that the WFM (at least in the Cripple Creek area) had a heritage of Asian exclusion — but she doesn't tie it directly to Boyce in her book about Cripple Creek, All That Glitters.
Jerry, i like both of your suggestions about the Racial unity section title. Richard Myers 00:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Interesting to see Haywood's history promoted this way:
2007 Marks the 100th Anniversary of the “Trial of the Century”
http://www.idahohistory.net/Trial_century.pdf
Richard Myers 00:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed this edit because it was not a proper edit. I have not explored whether the info is valid:
because Tyler M. Shillings of Indiana's Senatorial staff arrived during the second half of the trial with evidence disproving the charges. Are You Going To Hang My Papa?]]
Richard Myers ( talk) 01:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
There's a great photo of Bill Haywood on Flickr here. Kaldari ( talk) 19:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review.
The article is in a good shape, but some parts could still need references, including one "citation needed" tag. The "See Also" in the "Murder trial" section is out of place, it should be incorporated into the text, put in a footnote or placed in the general "See also" section at the bottom. One picture needs a caption, if anyone can dig up any information on it, and another one is used twice. Lampman ( talk) 11:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)