Talk:Birmingham campaign

message: See :Image:321037pv cropped.JPG. I'll put it in the article. Carcharoth (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it, but didn't realise it was not strictly part of the campaign. So I've added it to the bombing and church articles instead. Carcharoth (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Church photo ready 

message: The other two photos I found are not strictly central to this article, but I'll note them here in case you find a use for them.
*(1) :Image:03194v cropped.jpg: "Group of African Americans viewing the bomb-damaged home of Arthur Shores, NAACP attorney, Birmingham, Alabama" (5 September 1963) - see ppmsca 03194 - we don't have an article on Arthur Shores, but maybe we should? See his New York Time obituary from 1996.
*(2) :Image:04298v cropped.JPG: "Congress of Racial Equality conducts march in memory of Negro youngsters killed in Birmingham bombings, All Souls Church, 16th Street, Wash[ington], D.C." (22 September 1963) - see ppmsca 04298 - more the after effects, and more relevant to the articles about the bombings, but still, could be useful
I'll go and upload those now. Carcharoth (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two more photos 

message: Hi Moni3, I added an LoCE in-use tag to the top of the article a few moments ago, and I'm beginning my copyedit. If I get stuck or have questions, I'll post more comments here. Finetooth (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I'm around and should be able to answer fairly quickly. --Moni3 (talk) 19:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm watching as you go, and I have one comment so far. In the Commissioner of Public Safety Section, Klan members beat Freedom Riders in 1961. There is some speculation that the police department worked with the Klan to coincide the arrival of police 15 minutes after the riders announced when they would arrive in the bus station. For those 15 minutes, Klan members beat the Freedom Riders, with the knowledge of the police. So Connor did order police to intervene, but deliberately late. --Moni3 (talk) 21:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will go back to that tomorrow. Right now, my eyes have had it, and I need to get some sleep. I have been pretty heavy-handed in my editing, especially in re-writing the lead. I started to work on it at the beginning of my edit, then moved to the rest of the article before coming back to the lead. I thought its long paragraphs really needed to be broken up a bit and re-cast. I tried not to alter the sense of the original as I went, though I removed a few entire sentences and a couple of ideas. I removed Gandhi, for example, because he was mentioned in the lead but nowhere else. That violates MOS since the lead is to be a summary of the article proper, and I thought since you hadn't pursued the Gandhi idea, it probably would not be missed. You may notice other missing things or things not reasonably rearranged, and I'm sure it's not possible that I caught everything or that every one of my choices was spot on. I'll sleep on this and come back tomorrow for another shorter visit and perhaps catch the things I missed on the first round. We can discuss anything about the article at all. My changes aren't precious to me, and I mean them as suggestions rather than anything set in concrete. By the way, this is a most interesting article about a most interesting topic. Finetooth (talk) 05:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no lie. I'm impressed. I thought it would take you two hours at the most. You put quite a lot of time into it. I appreciate it very much! --Moni3 (talk) 13:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi again. I'm almost done with my second run-through. In the "After the campaign" section, I see a sentence that says, "By July, the desegregation laws were overturned, and some of the lunch counters in department stores complied with the new rules." The sense of this doesn't quite seem to fit the rest of the paragraph, and I'm wondering if the word "desegregation" really should be "segregation"? Finetooth (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I think Dystopos did that quick edit (thank you) before I could. Thank you again, Finetooth.  --Moni3 (talk) 22:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyeditor's comments

message: * I don't have the references on hand to expand/rewrite this section, but the change in government was pushed through by progressive moderates (such as the Young Businessmen's Association) who were hoping that a more progressive government would defuse the escalating tension and (depending on your view) either usher in peaceful progress toward civil rights or help preserve some of the status quo without inviting violence or a showdown with the federal courts. The election proved that a majority citizens were uncomfortable with having the galvanizing personality of Connor in power. Many wanted to proceed as Albany and other cities had done before, quietly and on their own terms. It was in this context that the ministers wrote their open letter to King asking for the demonstrations to be delayed. King responded directly to that request in his Letter from Birmingham Jail. --Dystopos (talk) 21:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some detail about this, with sources. --Moni3 (talk) 02:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: City government

message: Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this. 
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis. The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. BTW, anyone has the right to object, and my aim is not to argue against people on the issue. Tony (talk) 12:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead, Tony. On all my FAs. --Moni3 (talk) 12:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Moni! Tony (talk) 13:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to remove date-autoformatting 

message: Since the photographs in this article are mostly from 1963, there's a decent chance they are actually public domain now. Anything published in the US before 1964 only had a copyright term of 27 years unless the copyright was renewed, and most copyright renewals were just for books and films. Very few photographs, newspapers, or magazines were renewed. The trick is finding photographs that were actually published at the time, rather than later on in books. Usually you can look through newspapers from the era on microfilm to find some. Google books also has a thorough collection of Ebony and Jet magazines from the 1960s that often have photographs of civil rights actions. After some thorough digging, I was able to illustrate the Nashville sit-ins article with 100% public domain images. Kaldari (talk) 19:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright status of photographs 

message: Just made an edit on "Resolution" section to clarify that the Gaston Hotel/AD King bombing took place late at night, and the riot erupted in the early morning.  Also described extent of riot: state troopers called in, state troopers defied by crowd, thousands on streets, numerous fires, several stabbings.  Citations from Time magazine and Glenn T. Eskew's book.
GPRamirez5 (talk) 01:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit of "Resolution" section 

message: Please share your thoughts.  Thanks.
Mitchumch (talk) 06:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change to article 

message: "set at a level that would peel bark off a tree or separate bricks from mortar"  It doesn't matter the source the second part of that quote. It is not possible to peel mortar from bricks with high pressure water from a fire hose. Quotations should be limited to factual information not exaggerations or colorful descriptions.
108.206.18.197 (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:   under: fire hoses and police dogs 

message: As a life-long resident of Birmingham, and growing up during the civil rights era, I practically had a front row seat at some of the incidents mentioned in this article.  While it is a wonderfully written article and one can plainly see that an enormous amount of time went into it's writing, the flavor of the article leans to one side.  There are several sources used that are not actually historically correct, but personal versions of the incidents... reference # 72 is a perfect example, however there are a dozen and a half or so references like it used in the article writing.  The Birmingham Public Library has plenty of "authorized" books, magazines and newspapers with the true, unbiased versions, and someone should consider rewriting the article with true facts instead of "opinions". Roebuckjeffrey (talk) 12:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Somewhat Biased  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Birmingham campaign. 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/20070818222057/http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/birmingham_church/3.html to http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/birmingham_church/3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150309014723/http://cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/back.time/9605/15/ to http://cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/back.time/9605/15/
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) 23:57, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Birmingham campaign. 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/20080101133527/http://www.bcri.org/resource_gallery/interview_segments/index.htm to http://www.bcri.org/resource_gallery/interview_segments/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080101133527/http://www.bcri.org/resource_gallery/interview_segments/index.htm to http://www.bcri.org/resource_gallery/interview_segments/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) 16:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified