Talk:Social class in American history

message: ===Discussion of outline===
I like this article as outlined. I'll do what I can although I am totally too busy. Fred Bauder 15:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've started with bibliography then will go back and add content material. Please jump in! Rjensen 15:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please outline on the talk page not the article itself. Having a collection of section headings w/o corresponding sections hurts WPs credibility. Also, no offense, I appreciate the effort and understand the time constraints of real life, but if this article remians wihtout any actual text, I will have to replace the giant bibliography with a redirect to the social structure in the US article (One step short of deletion as I see potential). Again, I am not trying to be harsh, but am concerned over how an article w/o a body is going to make WP look. Thank you for understanding. Regards, Signaturebrendel 08:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Let's just keep the outline for now. I plan to fill in many of the details. Rjensen 09:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Regarding "This is nothing more than a bibliography": There are currently more "references" than sentences in the article, so it is unlikely that they are all truly references for the article. Books that are not actually referencing the information in the article should be moved off the main page until they do. -AED 04:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonsense. This article is being  written section by section, using the sources listed. It takes a while to cover such a cast topic so I hope editors will either be patient or actually help out by doing some reading and writing. Rjensen 05:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part of my statement do you consider "nonsense"? Are you asserting that every book listed in the References section actually references a particular statement in ther article? If not, remove them from the article until they do. One way to "help out" is to not give false impressions to other readers of the article. -AED 20:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Race, Class and Gender Models

message: I like this article as outlined. I'll do what I can although I am totally too busy. Fred Bauder 15:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've started with bibliography then will go back and add content material. Please jump in! Rjensen 15:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please outline on the talk page not the article itself. Having a collection of section headings w/o corresponding sections hurts WPs credibility. Also, no offense, I appreciate the effort and understand the time constraints of real life, but if this article remians wihtout any actual text, I will have to replace the giant bibliography with a redirect to the social structure in the US article (One step short of deletion as I see potential). Again, I am not trying to be harsh, but am concerned over how an article w/o a body is going to make WP look. Thank you for understanding. Regards, Signaturebrendel 08:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Let's just keep the outline for now. I plan to fill in many of the details. Rjensen 09:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Regarding "This is nothing more than a bibliography": There are currently more "references" than sentences in the article, so it is unlikely that they are all truly references for the article. Books that are not actually referencing the information in the article should be moved off the main page until they do. -AED 04:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonsense. This article is being  written section by section, using the sources listed. It takes a while to cover such a cast topic so I hope editors will either be patient or actually help out by doing some reading and writing. Rjensen 05:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part of my statement do you consider "nonsense"? Are you asserting that every book listed in the References section actually references a particular statement in ther article? If not, remove them from the article until they do. One way to "help out" is to not give false impressions to other readers of the article. -AED 20:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion of outline

message: I printed this article out on February 19, 2010, so I could read it.
Tonight I went in to do some minor editing and saw that the original subheading 'Southern colonies' had been changed to 'Frontier' AND that most of the material had been deleted. I'm wondering because it seems to me the original material belongs in the article.   Bettymnz4 (talk) 07:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This was vandalism by an anonymous user on March 4, 2010 that was reverted on March 29, 2010. —Mrwojo (talk) 21:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened? 

message: Words seem to be missing and thoughts stray off into nothingness.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  incomplete tag 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Social class in American history. 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/20121129024508/http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/05/06/classic-top-500-executives/ to http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/05/06/classic-top-500-executives/
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) 13:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)