Talk:Arsenal of Democracy

message: NOTE:  In mid-April 2006 this article was subjected to a peer review in the below talk.
#A number of concrete suggestions were made for the article development
#A number were made for materials which didn't belong. (These have been removed)
#If you are going to expand the article, please review those suggestions and the information they suggest to research first  carefully. 
We all thank you! <B>Fra</B>nkB 06:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: per Xpost to User_talk:RHaworth, after a flurry of minor adjustments by user: RHaworth in brand new article, including attempt to trasport to wikisource, before I'd matured further. <B>Fra</B>nkB
Hi! What a lovely way to jack up the edit counter! And me barely in Zzzzland! 
:There are a few of these FDR chats that are so important that we need the coverage here, IMHO. 
:If you disagree, I submit then the proper place to debate is on the talk with subsequent Vfd, etc. as the article matures.
:I have far too much other work hereon to care much one way or the other, but I was shocked and amazed when searching our whole data base a few nights back  failed to turn up this famous phrase. 
:Besides, my interest is in adding material, not exporting historic events because there is another wiki inadequately cross-searchable giving some coverage. Thus the detailed beginnings of the historical climate before and behind... something many readers browsing might find interesting and continue on from educationally, our focus, N'est pas?In my opinion, this kind of tying article is one of our greatest advantages over printed encyclopedias and certainly follows in the spirit of WP:Btw. 
:IMHO, such are doubly important as it's exactly the kind of presentation that gets one to read more, or so I hope to nefariously plot to educate millions. LOL! 
:No matter, the search failure alone is a rather serious shortcoming considering how many hits it gets with the coresponding google search for same, and wikipedia was missing it's normal prominence therein. (Xposting to Talk:Arsenal of Democracy)
I'm a tad surprised you're unhappy with an article like this on our shared history. If we hadn't had this event, You in the UK would have lost before we got involved.
Best regards, <B>Fra</B>nkB 16:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What is this alleged search failure - aren't these 55 hits enough? -- RHaworth 17:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Arsenal of Democracy]] Speech Article Impetus

message: *I don't really have a problem, 'man', save perhaps needing to write something in the first place, as my WikiPlate is very full—but with the underconstruction template, and the very recent generation, think you might have waited a bit, or made comments to the talk before taking over and deleting the speech proper. The other edits are fine (e.g. I was aware of the date issue-and once I verified, would have cleaned that up), but you make it hard for the search engine to find the key phrase within the speech by not at least excerpting parts of it.
*For the moment, I've put the corpus back as it stimulates cross thinking toward building the rest, especially the intro. I'm not a historian, but an reader of history with short ADD driven memory, that needs a refresh now and then. 
*I tend to agree the full text is uneeded once the article gets beyond draft stage, which this clearly hasn't yet. I'd have been delighted to find you'd filled in the years blow by blow with appropo materials. My scope on wikiP ranges far and wide, and I've no 'ownership' tendancies whatever as many can attest, but do expect a little leeway and basic courtesy when building something new.
===Search Points===
Arsenal of Democracy is Not prominent in this one: Admittedly, yours is the better search criteria, but I'm an old fart that's still coming up to speed on Google. The equivilent "+arsenal +of +Democracy" on our search engine is where I was amazed and triggered. Don't you think it would be a good idea to anticipate the more unsophisticated searcher's needs? As one, I certainly do!
*Let's get some work done. Enough talk for now.
*I lost 6-7 quality edits the other night in a browser lock-up, and this was but one redlink in that matter.  I need to finish this up so I can continue the backtracking and reedits needed as part of that cleaning up that fiasco. I think I need to download another browser before loosing the history trail! 
*So, later, OK? Obviously we have somewhat different styles, and I know you've been out there somewhere as I've seen a lot of your edits before this and visited your user page. I'm still a relative newbie learning all the tricks of the trade. If we were all the same, the world would be a less interesting place, No?
Best regards, <B>Fra</B>nkB 17:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Counterpoint Answer, No Problemo

message: Arsenal of Democracy is Not prominent in this one: Admittedly, yours is the better search criteria, but I'm an old fart that's still coming up to speed on Google. The equivilent "+arsenal +of +Democracy" on our search engine is where I was amazed and triggered. Don't you think it would be a good idea to anticipate the more unsophisticated searcher's needs? As one, I certainly do!
*Let's get some work done. Enough talk for now.
*I lost 6-7 quality edits the other night in a browser lock-up, and this was but one redlink in that matter.  I need to finish this up so I can continue the backtracking and reedits needed as part of that cleaning up that fiasco. I think I need to download another browser before loosing the history trail! 
*So, later, OK? Obviously we have somewhat different styles, and I know you've been out there somewhere as I've seen a lot of your edits before this and visited your user page. I'm still a relative newbie learning all the tricks of the trade. If we were all the same, the world would be a less interesting place, No?
Best regards, <B>Fra</B>nkB 17:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Search Points

message: :A post is being made Friday 14 April 2006 to a double handful of friendly admins & editors for some reactions, and advice (Peer Review) on this article, and it's remaining development, as I'd like to put it to bed ASAP:<B>Fra</B>nkB
Re: Arsenal_of_Democracy and section Arsenal_of_Democracy#The_address_itself.
0.   (semi-trivial) I was unable to get span/div formatting (italics) to cover the whole text, if someone can fix my fumbling, that would be great!
#What are the guidelines regarding wikisource vs editorial lattitude. This new article and I would appreciate and answer on that, and a general comment or three on it's general - well, generalities on Talk: Arsenal_of_Democracy . Content, style, usefullness, et. al. from all and sundry, curious and curiouser, etc. I figure to finish the bottom before next weekend (the 21st) and perhaps put it up for additional peer review at that time in the broader forum. 
#The key issues I've got in mind: 
##) What more should be covered in the intro section. (Add if you like!)
##) Did the prelude sections read too long, or was the presentation interesting enough to keep (kids esp.) reading. 
##) What to do about the speech text itself; 
:::a) Keep all vs. 
:::b) what to excerpt and retain as attention getting hooks to enviegle the unwary reader into the full text, and 
:::c) how will what is left balance against the remaining article. 
::*I am assuming the 1941 section will be similar to the sections preceding the speech, and the last issue 
::  4) is cites. In this case, it shouldn't need a lot, IMHO, as most of the presentation is WikiLinks to 'presumably well cited' articles. At the least it checks out against my Crystalized Knowledge as a lifelong reader of history! <G>
:3. There is also the little niggle of what 'extraneous content' listed in the chronological sections should or shouldn't be kept. For example, what was going on in and about concentration camps was not widely known until after the war, yet the presentation here includes them as if they were major news stories. There are other similar matters, individual ship sinkings, etc., again which were probably not well known. So if anything is obviously in error philosophically (if I can mangle the meaning of that with your concurrence) that strikes anyone as a bad or unfair thing to list, please (ahem) speak up.  
Miscellany: 
#I'm not terribly good at searching things out on the web, if someone could locate an audio clip on this, I think it would be a wonderful addition. It could be playing while the free world tale of woes is being purused.  
#There are a couple of other fireside chats mentioned in the chronologys, and advice on handling those (Yes, be assured, I'll evaluate them for a similar article if this concept proves advisable and desirable. I'm not sure all 30 deserve such treatment, but those were troubled times and many of them will.)
#The question of Wikiquotes cross links comes to mind, depending what is kept here. There are a handful of other culturally dynamic phrases widely quoted from this speech that come to mind— at least when I read it each time.
Later adds to requests from prior comments and edits... 
**I put an inuse template on the article pending the suggestions here, and assuming a week for comments and suggestions. The invitation was to help me figure out what to do, not do it for me! <G> So 'Thanks Mel'! You are a class guy! (Mel well knows how bad I am at the little details)
**As of the moment, I've reintroduced the speech in the article at the appropriate time, via a link  so a reaction to these forms is now desired. 
**and due to the many copyedits by my good friend Mel Etitis, I would like to add a request now for feedback on the chronological presentation. One year is compressed vertically — and one is not. The original was not. <G> 
**I think the spaced out looks and reads much better, and I've now seen it in two different skins. So please advise, and advise where or how the chronology should be treated. 
**The 'suggestions consensus' so far seems to be evolve this into a text treatment overall, which raises the point-- Chronology sections go where? subpage(s), discard totally, or what? If I do that, it should certainly be outside article space as it will require a massive involvement and research. If so, what should I so with this? Leave in place, or take it off line entirely?
Best regards, <B>Fra</B>nkB 02:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you've just arrived, it's too early to stop this wonderful input, so please chip in!!! <B>Fra</B>nkB
I've been responding one by one with thanks and comments for the valuable input below, but this post says most all of it, if I haven't gotten back to you personally and it's my bedtime. I don't think anything would be gained by any rebuttal or discussion to clarify a point yet, so I'm reserving that sort of thing for late in the coming week. But in general, I'm very pleased with the strip you all are tearing off my hyde. So...
 
Thanks! Great feedback— the flaws were just the kind of thing I was thinking myself, but the whole idea just came out of the blue when I couldn't find a reference to the title. My search techniques need upgrading, as another managed better. ;(
*The beginning still begs a good solution I think, but I'm most concerned with how to make it encyclopedic rather than an essay. Deep POV waters might lie in that thar' direction!
*Still, the reaction mirrors the reservations I had, and many of the ideas are well beyond my expectations.
*That's why I was looking for the help — this was essentially a preliminary draft of a concept which I could feel as a gestalt when I concieved it — how do I get someone to understand and appreciate what I know is the background of this lovely collection of words, and how do I present that while being constrained by encyclopedic formats?
*Well, this was stab#1 and I'd concieved this technique to avoid potential POV or an essay type structure. But while I'm still not quite sure how to start it, you folks are mostly all coming through with good ideas on how to build it in other ways, which may get me a solution for 'that issue' given a better uniform overall strategy. So thankyou again, or if you're just reading now, in advance. Keep the ideas coming, as the concepts are very valuable. Take it as a challange to come up with something I can do develop history+emotional fears+pace of events+speech into a encyclopedic beginning I can segueway into the suggestions that have preceded yours. If some thought is especially attractive or meritorious, please state it again. or tack in an interleaved note with the original comments.
*I'm going to leave things alone until late in the week after Easter, as these ideas are worth gold.
*Many Thanks! <B>Fra</B>nkB 06:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If I can trouble you for a little feedback 

message: Thanks for your time and effort here, All of you! <B>Fra</B>nkB 17:56, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you've just arrived, it's too early to stop this wonderful input, so please chip in!!! <B>Fra</B>nkB
I've been responding one by one with thanks and comments for the valuable input below, but this post says most all of it, if I haven't gotten back to you personally and it's my bedtime. I don't think anything would be gained by any rebuttal or discussion to clarify a point yet, so I'm reserving that sort of thing for late in the coming week. But in general, I'm very pleased with the strip you all are tearing off my hyde. So...
 
Thanks! Great feedback— the flaws were just the kind of thing I was thinking myself, but the whole idea just came out of the blue when I couldn't find a reference to the title. My search techniques need upgrading, as another managed better. ;(
*The beginning still begs a good solution I think, but I'm most concerned with how to make it encyclopedic rather than an essay. Deep POV waters might lie in that thar' direction!
*Still, the reaction mirrors the reservations I had, and many of the ideas are well beyond my expectations.
*That's why I was looking for the help — this was essentially a preliminary draft of a concept which I could feel as a gestalt when I concieved it — how do I get someone to understand and appreciate what I know is the background of this lovely collection of words, and how do I present that while being constrained by encyclopedic formats?
*Well, this was stab#1 and I'd concieved this technique to avoid potential POV or an essay type structure. But while I'm still not quite sure how to start it, you folks are mostly all coming through with good ideas on how to build it in other ways, which may get me a solution for 'that issue' given a better uniform overall strategy. So thankyou again, or if you're just reading now, in advance. Keep the ideas coming, as the concepts are very valuable. Take it as a challange to come up with something I can do develop history+emotional fears+pace of events+speech into a encyclopedic beginning I can segueway into the suggestions that have preceded yours. If some thought is especially attractive or meritorious, please state it again. or tack in an interleaved note with the original comments.
*I'm going to leave things alone until late in the week after Easter, as these ideas are worth gold.
*Many Thanks! <B>Fra</B>nkB 06:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: On the Preliminary Feedback 

message: I'm going to be honest. Roosevelt's speech itself is very interesting and article-worthy, but there isn't really much encyclopedic content about the speech in this article. I'm going to enumerate my suggestions below. (My numbers don't necessarily correspond to the numbers in the previous section.)
#The full timelines aren't really necessary in this article. It would probably be better to summarize in paragraph format the events closely related to Roosevelt's speech in a section titled "Historical background" or "Important events". Perhaps links to each year's article could be provided for those who want to see full timelines of key events. Example: Full timeline of key events in 1939.
#The full text of the speech isn't necessary. That's what Wikisource is for. However, important excerpts from the speech should be quoted, and their significance should be explained.
#Citing reliable sources is always helpful. It greatly improves the reliability of our articles. I would suggest trying to find some reliable analyses of the effects of the speech. That could make the article more interesting and more reliable. Some biographies of Roosevelt might also have some useful information about the events leading up to the speech as well as the speech's results.
I hope my suggestions help. --TantalumTelluride 19:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm going to be honest 

message: ;To the editors of this article......
Don't mind, but currently the article is in awful shape.
#There's a temporary section title to lead which should never be there. If you are concerned about editing the whole article, you can pick any of the smallest section to edit. Then in the address bar, you can replace "action=edit§ion=n" with "...section=0". This will get you to display and edit only the lead. An article should not have a lead title in my opinion.
# Have you realized how long the first sentence is. Break it into 3 sentences, if not 4. Its completely unreadable.
# Choice of yellow is poor. Its very difficult for people to read text against such a bright background. Change it to something lighter, preferably a shade of gray.
# Move all sister project links (wikisource, etc.) to the external links section.
# Such a long timeline in list format without any mention how any of these events are related to the topic in concern is boring enough for me (In this, others may disagree). Can you make it in paragraph format and not a loose collection of events.
-Ambuj Saxena (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on Article 

message: Hi there - thanks for the invitation for some feedback. Here’s some of my suggestions:
I have to echo some of the sentiments expressed above. It is not very clear what this article aims to convey, and I suspect what would be necessary is to narrow the scope a little bit. Some of the historical events should be relegated to other articles, and subsequently referenced from this page. In my mind, the article should focus solely on the speech that Roosevelt’s speech – its political, social, and economic impact, as well as the linguistic and aesthetic elements which were used to convey the president’s sentiments.
The article should contain some information and preliminaries about the speech – the speech writer, its duration, where it was broadcast, how much of the public knew about the speech. The reaction from the general public and the international community should be noted. The opening of the speech mentions “national security” – in what sense is this speech relevant to the world today? The article needs to establish its notability from a historical and context.
There are an exceptional number of literary devices and allusions used in the speech. Some of the imagery and personifications that Roosevelt invokes are particularly poignant. The article should mention why these themes were important at the time, and whether these have had any lasting impact on the American perception and understanding of concepts such as freedom, liberty, and democracy. The article should explain why the general public resonated with these themes.
Some comparisons between similar speeches made by other Roosevelt and other presidents should be made, or minimally referenced in the article. For example, part of the speech mentions
:’’… if the United States of America interfered with or blocked the expansion program of these three nations- a program aimed at world control—they would unite in ultimate action against the United States.”
In what sense was “world control” interpreted? Why was the terminology introduced, and how is this historically relevant? At which point did the United States perceive itself as being threatened, and how did this impact its international policies? Note that the speech also mentions mass enslavement in the subsequent paragraph. Why was this intensifier used?
The relevance of the Monroe Doctrine needs to be addressed – this is something which Roosevelt mentions as a partial justification for his reasoning. The article should also analyze the structure of the speech itself – for example, is it argumentative or persuasive? Which historians have taken which perspective? What are the current established commentaries regarding this speech?
It is particularly interesting that the speech mentions Ireland, Hawaii and the Azores. Perhaps a map of the world with these places indicated would be beneficial for the reader to see why these were mentioned. Under what context would mentioning Ireland help Roosevelt’s cause? Also, what American values are outlined the speech? These should be summarized – for example, one line mentions liberty, religion, and hope. The article should also mention what the perceived role of a democratic nation is – was this speech a turning point in American history?
Anyway, this should contain plenty of ideas for article improvement. Much of it can be written very neutrally if supported by various citations and references. I hope this helps! --HappyCamper 20:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More feedback 

message: Genrally I'm in agreement with much of the above; in fact I've already done some work on the article, removing the text of the talk, tidying the summary, etc.  I've begun tidying the timeline, but here again I agree that it shouldn't really be here — a paragraph explaining the context of the talk should be enough.
There's an awful lot of overlinking, and the general Wikipedia style (headings, etc.) needs to be adhered to.  I don't think that you can ask other editors to fill in your sources...
I'll keep looking, and come back with any further thoughts. --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 20:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried tidying the summary, in fact, but some of it still defeats me.  What is the material in inverted commas, for example? --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 20:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More comments 

message: The comments above show many good points, and I'm pretty much in line with TantalumTelluride. My main concerns are these:
- I'm afraid the list dominates too much space. It a good list, and very relevant elsewhere, but in this particular case, a few blocks of text highlighting the main points of the historical background would be enough. If a page exists listing the main events leading up to World War II (it must be around somewhere), a link should be added to it.
- The actual full text of the speech belongs in Wikisource, but important extracts of it should be quoted and commented. The commentary and analysis is the essential element in this article. Try finding information to highlight the key issues raised here. What is FDR's message? Why is he saying it? What is of interest for his audiences (the American people, Britain, Germany etc.)? Who is he actually addressing - the American people or Europe? How is the material presented? What does he expect will be the result - for the United States, for the world, and for himself? Does the speech benefit anybody, if so, who, how and why? Is he trying to save the world, guarantee a reelection or something different? Is he already thinking about the situation when the war will be over? E.g. the lend-lease agreement meant the U.S. replacing Britain as the leading naval power in the Western Hemisphere when Britain was pretty much forced into handing over a number of bases to the U.S. Well, I don't know. I'm also a bit curious if he wrote the text himself, or if a member of his staff did it. 
- A link to the actual recording should be added. So far, I've found this page: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~1930s2/Time/Marcy/fdrsenal.html (Real Player in a decent recording). The article should also link to Wikisource, but this has already been taken care of. 
To sound a bit like one of my professors: Never lose sight of the "WH-words" (who, what, when, why etc.) Or the boiled-down version: "ask a question and answer it." I'm not trying to scare you, but trying to present a number of issues you should keep in mind when reading about the material.
It is an interesting topic. Best of luck. Valentinian (talk) 23:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A bit more comment

message: I am sorry but User:Fabartus seems to be using this article as a vehicle to create a fork of various existing articles on WWII. The article should be radically chopped down. Mention of other historical events should be restricted to those which directly influenced the speech and those which, other sources agree, were a direct result of the speech. -- RHaworth 08:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there is too much irrelevant iformation in the article, but I don't think he's trying to intentionally create a fork at all. He isn't sure what kind of information to include in the article because he wants to avoid NPOV violation. In fact, in the requests he sent out to various user talk pages, he specifically asked for help on cutting out the irrelevant events in the timelines. This article is still in the early stages of development. It will improve over time. --TantalumTelluride 19:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of leadership, the speech is frequently seen as the "next step" in a several stage process in awakening a somnolent, inward-looking country that had been isolationist and self-absorbed culturally for the preceding two decades. While the United States Navy seemed strong and was widely percieved to guarantee the Western Hemisphere safe from Axis agressions– the United States Army numbered barely two hundred and fifty thousand officers and enlisted men as the 1930s came to a close – the foreign wars off in Europe, Africa, and Manchuria (China) seemed of little importance to the average American still reeling from the horrors of the depression.
...is a great jumping-off point; you could elaborate on the specific events and treaties Roosevelt references in his speech to explain why it is important. 
Those are my first impressions, in a it's-3am-I-am-supposed-to-be-up-for-Easter mindset. I did want to look at the article and give some feedback this evening, though. I hope it is helpful. I would like to say that I think an idea of having articles about the fireside chats is wonderful. A lot of people, myself included, would love to read through them and historical guidance on the issues surrounding them is appreciated. Have a good night! Namaste, Mademoiselle Sabina 06:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: fork

message: For the comment jar here. :)
I agree with this comment, made above: Mention of other historical events should be restricted to those which directly influenced the speech and those which, other sources agree, were a direct result of the speech. I think the timeline and the section "before America enters the war" could be nixed from the article altogether. The 30s/early 40s isolationist stance of America, the lend-lease program, etc., would all be better addressed in separate articles about American policy related to WWII and perhaps linked to this article in a "See Also" section. The paragraph you have here: 
::In terms of leadership, the speech is frequently seen as the "next step" in a several stage process in awakening a somnolent, inward-looking country that had been isolationist and self-absorbed culturally for the preceding two decades. While the United States Navy seemed strong and was widely percieved to guarantee the Western Hemisphere safe from Axis agressions– the United States Army numbered barely two hundred and fifty thousand officers and enlisted men as the 1930s came to a close – the foreign wars off in Europe, Africa, and Manchuria (China) seemed of little importance to the average American still reeling from the horrors of the depression.
...is a great jumping-off point; you could elaborate on the specific events and treaties Roosevelt references in his speech to explain why it is important. 
Those are my first impressions, in a it's-3am-I-am-supposed-to-be-up-for-Easter mindset. I did want to look at the article and give some feedback this evening, though. I hope it is helpful. I would like to say that I think an idea of having articles about the fireside chats is wonderful. A lot of people, myself included, would love to read through them and historical guidance on the issues surrounding them is appreciated. Have a good night! Namaste, Mademoiselle Sabina 06:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two more cents

message: I'll be brief: I fail to see why this article need the timeline at all. Merge it with existing timeline or spin off to its own article, but it's bizarre that 90% of the current article is basically a giant 'see also' section. Sure they are relevant - so is the entire history of the world. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 07:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Turn the timeline into a paragraph of prose. Then maybe something about the writing of the speech, and who he was influenced by. Then the existing section on the speech itself, and then the impact.--HereToHelp 19:47, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the timeline? 

message: Definitely an important broadcast.  Needs ocncentration why he needed to say particualr things.  Who advised him.  The timeline looks like an other topic or article.  Midgley 19:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important 

message: The intro doesn't tell you what the Arsenal of Democracy is until later on. It just needs some restructuring.  -- penubag  (talk) 10:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: introduction paragraph

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Arsenal of Democracy. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130828141002/http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130103/OPINION01/301030336 to http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130103/OPINION01/301030336
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130406013244/http://www.ushistory.org/us/50d.asp to http://www.ushistory.org/us/50d.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:07, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The 2nd audio file is reaching past the text on the right border. The format should match that of the first audio file that is linked which fits in line with the article. Sideriver84 (talk) 21:43, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio links