Talk:Virginia Company

message: How could James I grant a charter in 1584 when he wasn't king of england until 1603? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.70.51.232 (talk) 00:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  1584? 

message: Acccording to the Encycopedia Brittanica https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pilgrim-Fathers  Of the 102 colonists, 35 were members of the English Separatist Church (a radical faction of Puritanism) , thus these Separatists were in fact Puritans, and as a group 35/102 is only 34%, a  minority, not the majority needed to label the group Pilgrims. It was not "Pilgrims" that founded the Massachussets bay colony but Puritans and I have reservations about capitalizing the word puritan, for Puritans were Anglicans that sought to make pure the Church of England. In 1630, John Winthrop led some 1,000 English Puritans in the initial wave of the Great Migration to the Massachusetts Bay Colony, north of Plymouth. They were fleeing the royal wrath of King Charles I and Bishop William Laud, who were escalating persecution of dissidents.https://www.newsweek.com/whats-difference-between-pilgrim-and-puritan-397974. Thus your pilgrims were actually a minority of emigrants, 34% of the Mayflower contingent.It is thus an error to label all such as "Pilgrims", yet it persists as a national myth, akin to George Washington chopping down a cherry tree.Oldperson (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The context is not Massachusetts Bay Colony at all, but Plymouth Colony. The link is deliberately to the Puritans who settled Plymouth and are referred to as "the Pilgrims"--always capitalized. Your link to the Puritan migration is an overall, generic reference to the 40-year migration which essentially settled Massachusetts Bay; the sentence is speaking specifically about the Mayflower Puritans. That is why I restored it.  —Dilidor (talk) 17:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Except that your beloved pilgrims were only 34% of the Mayflower Manifest, Ergo those who landed at Plymouth Rock (if that is where they really landed. I can't see them stepping off a rowboat onto a rock, were Puritans. The Separatist Puritans, aka pilgrims,were a minority. Thus the article is in errorOldperson (talk) 18:18, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Once again, you become hostile, belligerent, abusive, and offensive. This conversation is ended. Never again post an offensive diatribe on my user's page as you did recently, lest you want to be banned from Wikipedia.  —Dilidor (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

text:  That comment was neither offensive nor a diatribe, it certainly was not belligerent and abusive. It is factual, the only  mistake I made was mentioning your "Beloved Pilgrims", and that statement was based on your apparent obsession with said group. I apologize for call them your "beloved", the rest of the post is factual. Pilgrims were only 34% of the manifest of  the Mayflower see https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pilgrim-Fathers. I am  interested in facts not myths. And you are in no position to command me or ban me from wikipedia. If you wish to discuss on Administrators Notice Board I am ready, but no threats.I believe that threatening editors as you jave just done meets the criteria for disciplinary action  It would behoove yo uand demonstrate food faith if you addressed the issues anbd facts raised rather than respond emotionally and threateningly..Oldperson (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Puritans vs Pilgrims

message: Claimed here 16:40, 23 August 2019‎ Dilidor talk contribs‎ 16,341 bytes -567‎ Reverted to revision 912137643 by Dilidor (talk): Unexplained removal of template (TW) undothank Tags: Undo PHP7. When in fact it was Dilidor that removed the template  here: cur prev 14:09, 23 August 2019‎ Dilidor talk contribs‎ 16,341 bytes -194‎ →‎The Plymouth Company: copy edit; removing template undothank Tag: PHP7
The paragraph that Dilidor reverted has been reverted back in. The paragraph is factual, contributive and supported by a citation linked to Encyclopaedia BritannicaOldperson (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Template Removal

message: I didn't think, until today, that I would have to explain that my thanks were sincere. Yours was a good edit, in fact most of your edits are very good, even if I don't understand why, however there is a redundant phrase inVirginia Company,  found in the lede and the article. I  like it but it is awkward  "forming the genesis of democracy in America".Oldperson (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Thanks for your recent edit

message: Nothing about Poles, who were decisive workers and were crucial for the continuation of the first settlements in the USA.
More... https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/polish-artisans-strike-right-vote-jamestown-virginia-1619#:~:text=By%201608%2C%20just%20a%20year%20after%20the%20founding,played%20a%20significant%20role%20in%20Jamestown%E2%80%99s%20economic%20viability.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.4.52.163 (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poles and Wirginia Company