Talk:Historiographic issues about the American Civil War: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:

{{tl|db-author}}


This page is in response to many questions posted on the discussion page for the [[American Civil War]] article.[[User:Jimmuldrow|Jimmuldrow]] 22:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This page is in response to many questions posted on the discussion page for the [[American Civil War]] article.[[User:Jimmuldrow|Jimmuldrow]] 22:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:32, 2 November 2007


This page is in response to many questions posted on the discussion page for the American Civil War article.Jimmuldrow 22:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

I realize why this page was created. And it is very, very well-written. But to me, this page reads like a textbook, or even a manual, and violates WP:NOT#TEXT. One would not find "Simple answers about the American Civil War" in a paper encyclopedia, for example. That an article like this is needed indicates, perhaps, that the introduction page to the American Civil War article needs radical revamping and that much of the detailed material needs to be moved to their own pages. On the other hand, this is a complex topic, and simple questions about it deserve complex answers. It might just be too bad if elementary or middle school children can't readily understand it. (That's what teachers are for.) - Tim1965 01:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the reasons why this article has been suggested for deletion. I disagree that this should be deleted, however, because this article has been badly needed for some time. I always thought we'd develop a "controversies of the ACW" or some such article, and here Jim has done that. I think we should fix, perhaps move, but not delete. BusterD 10:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest move to: "Issues of the American Civil War". It's a noun with a prepositional phrase, the preferred construction. I see only tiny fixes necessary to accomplish the move. What do you think, Jim? BusterD 13:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and delete. I'll try to find a better way to address these issues. Any attempt to do so in the main article doesn't seem to work, and adds clutter.Jimmuldrow 23:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]