Talk:History of Minnesota

message: Overkill. Why not start with the Big Bang? As far as I can tell, it's the convention with this type of article to go back only to the earliest human habitation (see History of California, History of Texas and Utah#History). Maybe the geological history - cleaned up, as a deal of it's a bit amateur ("thunder lizards" have a proper name, y'know) - could be put under a separate article called Minnesota regional geology or similar? Tearlach 02:51, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Geological history

message: The Minnesota Historical Society list of history topics would be a good place to start expanding this article.  (And it needs expanding -- the article doesn't even cover major historical figures like Hubert Humphrey or Walter Mondale.)  If nothing else, the topic areas on the page could cover some of the topic division of this article.  --Elkman 19:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topics that should be covered 

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.
* Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.See footnote
* Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
* See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.See footnote 
* There may be an applicable infobox for this article.See footnote (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
* Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.See footnote
* There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.  See footnote 
* Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
** While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 17 additive terms, a bit too much.
** Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
** Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
* As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space inbetween. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]
* Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. See footnote
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.  Ravedave (help name my baby) 01:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Auto Peer Review

message: :1. Well written? Pass
:2. Factually accurate? Pass
:3. Broad in coverage? Pass
:4. Neutral point of view? Pass
:5. Article stability? Pass
:6. Images? Pass
It thus passes all the GA criteria with success and is thoroughly well written. It is broad enough and as expected it is neutral. Some pictures really help the reader in situating the context and in picturing the areas. Lincher 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA passed

message: Tutmosis has begun copyediting the article.  IMO, some of what he has done improves the clarity and mission of the article, however, in some cases he has changed meanings or facts, most likely inadvertently, such as changing 1600s and 1700s to 16th century and 17th century. In order to avoid massive simultaneous editing, I'll wait a few days to see if he is done before correcting mistakes he has introduced.  If it gets too screwed up, we can revert to Jonathunder's 11 October version. Appraiser 02:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some Revert Needed

message: I don't think "Contemporary Politics" describes the content.  e.g. The first paragraph starts with the 1948 convention.  Perhaps the section should try to do an overview of politics from 1840 to present, in keeping with the history of the state.  I'd also like to see the  put back in to direct the reader there for more detail.  Appraiser 14:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *That makes sense to me now.  How about ===Post-war politics=== as a header?  --Appraiser 17:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Works for me.  --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 18:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Politics

message: Under this section, I think it would be more complete if someone could add a blurb about the University of Minnesota.  They have a number of world medical "firsts", especially in the transplant field.  A couple of big events could probably be picked out of this list and referenced to the following link: U of M page .......   Another possible ref  Gopher backer 21:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hotbed of medical care and research 

message: What's left before nominating for FA? -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 22:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wanted to mention a little bit about Paul Wellstone in the "Postwar Politics" section, at least from a historical perspective as one of Minnesota's influential state senators.  Also, if anyone wants to review the intro section to make sure it's concise, that would help.  After that, I think it's ready for the FA nomination.  I'm on vacation right now (in warm, sunny Miami), and I didn't want to nominate the article before I got back.  I'll be back early next week.  --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 16:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The first reference is a dead link.  Even though it was gathered on 1/12/07, I think the Star Tribune pulls a lot of their general news articles off the web about three weeks after they're published.   Gopher backer 16:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, the reference is a dead link, and they pull their articles after about three weeks or so.  I'll pull the URL from that reference, but since they published the article in the paper on that date, I think it's still valid to cite the article in the first place.  --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 22:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's left? 

message: Comments on the Featured Article candidacy indicate the introduction may be too long.  Here is my suggested revision (text only):
:The history of Minnesota is the human history of the U.S. state of Minnesota from the earliest human settlement to the present day.  It tells the story of a land shaped by the influences of both its original Native American settlers and more recent European immigrants.  In the past several centuries the state’s economy has transitioned from one based on extractive industries such as fur trading,  logging, agriculture, and mining all made possible by abundant natural resources, to today’s diverse economy with particular emphases on banking, computers, and health care, while logging, farming, and mining remain prominent.
:The first people came to the region during the last Ice Age, following herds of game. The Anishinaabe, the Sioux, and the other Native American inhabitants of the region represent the descendants of these first early settlers. European presence began with the arrival of French fur traders in the 1600s. During the 1800s most of the Native American population was driven out as American settlers moved westward.   Fort Snelling was built between 1819 and 1825 as a frontier outpost to protect the United States' territorial interests.  The fort guarded Saint Anthony Falls which attracted early settlers seeking power for sawmills; it also protected the downriver settlement which became Saint Paul.  Minnesota Territory was organized in 1849, and on May 11, 1858,  Minnesota became the 32nd US state.
:Shortly after statehood came the American Civil War and the Sioux Uprising.  Following these disruptions the state entered into an era of intense growth, with immigrants attracted by opportunities in logging and agriculture.  The construction of railroads in the late 19th century helped to attract immigrants, establish the farm economy, and bring goods to market.  Minneapolis grew up next to Saint Anthony Falls and the water power from the falls, coupled with innovations in milling methods, enabled the city to become the “milling capital of the world”.
:The discovery of huge deposits of high-grade iron ore in northern Minnesota at the end of the 19th century led to the development of an industry which included open-pit mining of th ore and its and shipment to Great Lakes steel mills via ports at Duluth and Two Harbors.  The development of the flour milling and mining industries along with other changes in the economy resulted in population shifts from rural areas into central cities.  Economic development and social changes led to a more prominent role for the state government.
:The Great Depression was felt with layoffs in the iron mining industry and with trouble in labor relations, but New Deal programs brought relief to the state.  After World War II, Minnesota companies such Sperry Rand, Honeywell and Control Data started the high-tech sector.  The Twin Cities also became a regional center for arts and culture with several cultural institutions such as the Guthrie Theater, Minnesota Orchestra, and the Walker Art Center.
I think it squeezes a couple of lines out of the present text.  If the authors of this article feel it it useful, please use it.  Kablammo 20:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it. I may suggest some minor tweaks, but I'll let others weigh in first.  Kablammo 22:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, Susanlesch.  I used the introduction you provided, but with a few minor tweaks.  The shorter format looks better -- I have to admit that the introduction was too long.  Anyone else is welcome to revise it.  --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 01:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: User:Betacommand is trying to delete anything that links to www.famousamericans.net, including valid sourcing in articles such as this.  It's an attempt to purge WP of "spam" to for-profit sites.  In this article, the reference in question was added at least a year ago, prior to the article achieving FA status.  There is a discussion here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard about it.  Personally, I'd rather see a statement sourced by a for-profit site then unsourced (the same argument could be made for newspapers, magazines, and other news sources. --Appraiser (talk) 14:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A I am not a bot, second there is a major reliability issue here. along with the massive spamming that has been done by that domain. βcommand 14:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should all strive to successively improve the quality of the sources we cite.  Perhaps we eventually will get to the point where all of our sources are to peer-reviewed or fully sourced authorities.  But until we get to that point, reference to some source is better than none, and neither articles nor their editors should suffer because of unrelated spamming from or regarding the domain from which the source is taken.  Let's limit the remedy to the harm; stop the spamming, eliminate the addition of the domain from External links sections, but allow the retention of sources used in in-line referencing.  Kablammo (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: that fails to address the fact that the site is not reliable and thus should not be linked to. βcommand 15:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not clear to me why it is not reliable-- I don't have time to research that now.  I doubt no one's good faith here.  Perhaps a solution is to retain the source but have the Minn Wikiproject members undertake to replace it.  Kablammo (talk) 15:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reinstated the reference.  Is this an acceptable substitute?  Kablammo (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *From what I can tell, the only fact being cited by the reference is that Picard dn Gay was there too.  Therefore I think it is a good substitute.  Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: 
# Thank you Kablammo.
# Betacommand, I believe you are now in violation of the 3R rule.
# The "fact" that is cited in this case is that Father Louis Hennepin was accompanied by Michel Aco and Antoine Auguelle (aka Picard Du Gay). Are you claiming that that is not true? Based on what alternate source? If it is not true, why don't you fix the article and provide your source?  To simply delete the reference because you believe it to be unreliable without changing the text makes no sense at all to me.
# As an FA, this article has been well-scrutinized.  It offends me that in the article's 3+year history, the only "contribution" you have provided is to delete the source used on a statement about a relatively uncontroversial event that happened three hundred years ago at a place you have probably never been to.  I ask you again to please cease and desist.  Thank you.--Appraiser (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: whether or or not its FA makes no difference, what its referencing does not matter, the fact is what you are citing has know to lie about information is NOT a reliable source and should not be used. Please find a better source. βcommand 15:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: bots on the loose

message: Per Durova's message at WP:AN#In plain English, I have again removed the famousamericans.net link.  Take a look at that whole thread for details.  Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The site has now been blacklisted.  This method of procedure is hardly respectful of the collaborative process, nor of the work of many editors.  For a handful of editors to remove in-line references added by many editors to many articles (even user sandboxes), without adequate explanation or discussion with those affected, is unwise. This matter was under active discussion above and yet this precipitate action was taken to forestall it.  Kablammo (talk) 17:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please also see the diff here. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and the discussion rages on there, and elsewhere, with differing points of view. Is not collaboration and discussion an important value here? When parties are working toward a solution do you not know how destructive it can be to present them a fait accompli? Kablammo (talk) 17:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: the site has major RS issues, they said George Washington was the 4th president of the USA, get over it, and find better sources. βcommand 17:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be a problem, unless it is referring to officers under the Articles of Confederation.  Kablammo (talk) 17:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: the whole domain has problems. Please also note my wording, I said the fourth president. there is one entry were the guy is his own father. there is no need to disprove every page if you know the people running the site are full of bullshit. βcommand 17:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: β, that may well be.  And if so, then we should find a better reference-- something we were working on, as you see above.  But the removal of the link from a FA, accompanied only by a cryptic explanation linking to the wrong page, followed by a blacklisting of the site (by another editor) while discussion was ongoing at the page where that discussion is located and at several talk pages, was unproductive.  In these articles we believe in collaboration and discussion; we have always managed to work things out without involving any sort of process other than direct discussion.  I do not question your motives; I only suggest your methods could have been better. We all have a common interest-- to improve the quality of our work, including references, and discussion with and suggestions from you or anyone are welcome. Kablammo (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the quantity of articles that had references pointing to famousamericans.net, it would have been completely impossible to notify major contributors to all of the articles that linked to it.  I'm sorry that the process seems poor, but it's a spam site with garbage information in it, so to me it's better to protect against it even if it results in a discussion like this one, rather than having it plastered all over Wikipedia.  Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This reasoning sounds an awful lot like the reasoning I hear from teachers who never allow their students to look at Wikipedia (because it has errors).  I checked George Washington's entry on famousamericans.net (now blacklisted) and see no glaring errors.  The example cited may have been a short-lived revision just like we see here every day.  I agree that the site should not be allowed to stay in External links sections, and that if it is cited as a reference, the facts need to be scrutinized.  But in this particular case, I don't believe the facts are in error and I don't believe it was added by a spammer or in an inappropriate place.  Fortunately Kablammo found an alternative reference for us to use here, but I believe wholesale deletion of references without bothering to check for accuracy or appropriateness is counterproductive to Wikipedia, and that is the reason I first thought the action was that of a bot (blind deletion without human scrutiny).--Appraiser (talk) 18:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of famousamericans.net link 

message: Started recording for May 11 front FA. Enjoy my bastardized French! .:DavuMaya:. 06:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recording 

message: Any way that first sentence can be changed? It makes it sound like the blurb on the back of a book or for a film. Not encyclopedic at all. Al Tally (talk) 11:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the most blurb like bit (in my opinion). Guest9999 (talk) 17:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence 

message: From the Great Depression section of the article:
'One of the causes of the Depression was that United States businesses in the 1920s had improved their efficiency through standardizing production methods and eliminating waste. Business owners were reaping the benefits of this increase in productivity, but they were not sharing it with their employees because of the weakness of organized labor, nor were they sharing it with the public in the form of lowered prices. Instead, the windfall went to stockholders. The eventual result was that consumers could no longer afford the goods that factories were producing.'
I've never heard this explanation before.  It doesn't seem sensible to begin with (wouldn't competing businesses try to lower prices to increase sales?), and there is extensive documentation of far more significant causes in the Great Depression article.  I know this claim is referenced, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced out. 74.65.13.18 (talk) 11:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A bigger question would be why this explanation is in the article at all.  Nothing specific in the history of Minnesota is part of this cause so why is it here?  I think we should delete the statement.  What's relevant here is how the Great Depression affected the history of Minnesota, not what caused it. DavidRF (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I got that particular statement from Norman Risjord in his book A Popular History of Minnesota.  I think he was making the argument that this particular cause of the Depression was especially applicable to Minnesota.  He also writes: "Minnesota, with its 'open shop' mills and mines, commitment to industrial peace, and long-suffering farmers, helped bring about the crash and shared in the general economic decline."  He later makes the point that Minnesota's experience during the Depression helped shape the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party and its platforms during the 1930s.  I'll think about whether there's a way to reword that section, or if there's a way to make the Minnesota portion more relevant.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 01:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  That sounds very reasonable, Elkman. I don't know why the first ideological policeman sees himself as an arbiter of Depression history, given he claims to have never heard a basic, famous, and extensively-analyzed impetus to that and the current Depression. Reassert history. This article seems to have been overly sanitizied of Minnesota's remarkable political history.Blanche Poubelle (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of Great Depression 

message: FYI: I just created a new article Territorial era of Minnesota covering the period from the Louisiana Purchase to statehood. It's perhaps at a C quality level now and needs a lot of scrubbing (including more references) but I think it is pretty "complete" contentwise.
Any comments are welcome. And thanks to User:Elkman for providing a number of references that saved me a lot of time.
--Mcorazao (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI: New related article 

message: Nothing on this topic. Sca (talk) 14:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Immigration?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Minnesota. 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/20060622021939/http://www.hagley.lib.de.us/2015.htm to http://www.hagley.lib.de.us/2015.htm
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080510142531/http://www.rchs.com/index.htm to http://www.rchs.com/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:54, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Minnesota. 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/20070930190242/http://www.carvercountyhistoricalsociety.org/about_us/historypages/JonathanCarver.htm to http://www.carvercountyhistoricalsociety.org/about_us/historypages/JonathanCarver.htm
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080515034658/http://www.sos.state.mn.us/student/mncnote.html to http://www.sos.state.mn.us/student/mncnote.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of Minnesota. 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/20060715120103/http://www.geo.umn.edu/mgs/cuyuna/cuyuna.html to http://www.geo.umn.edu/mgs/cuyuna/cuyuna.html
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141028022242/http://www.mayoclinic.org/tradition-heritage/ww-mayo-life.html to http://www.mayoclinic.org/tradition-heritage/ww-mayo-life.html
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120619072004/http://www.mayoclinic.org/tradition-heritage/tornado-saint-marys.html to http://www.mayoclinic.org/tradition-heritage/tornado-saint-marys.html
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071103195934/http://www.startribune.com/1752/story/35558.html to http://www.startribune.com/1752/story/35558.html
* Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070214094544/http://www.mnip.org/history.shtml to http://www.mnip.org/history.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: the topic is important according to all the state historians. According to Google scholar there are over 270,000 discussions in scholarly books and articles re [Minnesota "civil war"]  see https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C27&q=Minnesota+%22civil+war%22&btnG=  Rjensen (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , I just saw a concerning edit summary about Civil War content removed, but haven't looked closely. Please have a look at my comments at Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of Minnesota/archive1; you might be able to lend a hand. A good deal of work is needed here, and some books will need to be consulted. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  01:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  who lost the Civil War 

message: Section moved here for future reference. WP:UNDUE in this article per SandyGeorgia and I agree. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:42, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lynchings and executions 

message: The Independent Development of Civil Rights in Minnesota: 1849-1910 SandyGeorgia (Talk)  00:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Civil rights

message: For reasons similar to Lynchings and executions above, the Klan is WP:UNDUE and that paragraph is copied here for future reference. I've been through this story before in Minneapolis. It looked bright and shiny like it belonged. However, gross spectacle didn't lead to any lasting effect, and I am confident that the two sentences that remain in this article are enough. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's too much information, but see the section just above this one.  A section on civil rights might include one line about the KKK in Minnesota, along with other developments. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  16:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, SandyGeorgia. I plan to use William Green's 2015 book, Degrees of Freedom: The Origins of Civil Rights in Minnesota, 1865–1912 (Green cites the paper you posted above.) I bought it years ago; now's my chance to read it. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ku Klux Klan 

message: Living Veterans in Minnesota as of 2014
War         	Veterans
World War II	18,523
Korea       	34,270
Vietnam     	129,641
Gulf War    	97,696
Moving this here for discussion; unclear what it adds to the article, and unless a secondary source considers these numbers significant to the history of Minnesota, or has some commentary on them, the content seems WP:UNDUE. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  20:26, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Mention of wars in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq might justify inclusion but I have no problem with the table coming out. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living veterans 

message: Re  IBM building the "world's fastest supercomputer" cannot be cited to IBM-- it requires independent, third-party sourcing.  {{pb}] Also, I can't tell what the sentence means.  What does the 2004 to 2008 refer to?  The years it was fastest?  The years it was built?  The model number?  What is the "and Watson"?  Another computer they built?  What is the "palace?  A residence or business?  I'm trying to vary the prose also to avoid built ... built ... and forcing the reader to click out to see what an Eero Saarinen is, and avoid mixing a building with two computers, but I can't tell what the sentence means. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  15:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ha... I see I was misreading what source it was; and now I will read the source to address my prose queries.  Thanks, Susan; my apologies. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  17:10, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

text: I rewrote to this to conform with the source; sorry again for misreading what the source was. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  17:30, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You did a great job of writing English from the contracted sentence I had. Thanks. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I edit a lot from my iPad, because of back pain, and miss stuff ... like the correct source :)  Sorry for the extra agida, SandyGeorgia (Talk)  20:18, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technology