Talk:William Stacy

message: Even though the article received a B, the article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Thank you very much for the assessment. Will incorporate suggestions for improvement. Appreciate the feedback. Sincerely, ColWilliam 22:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Will incorporate suggestions

message: Appreciate the suggestion of including a portrait of William Stacy. Unfortunately, there is no available published painting (portrait) or drawing of William Stacy. Also, Dr. Lemonds, the author of the “Col. William Stacy” book, was unable to locate a drawing, portrait, or likeness when he wrote the book in 1993. In addition to searching for a published portrait, Dr. Lemonds interacted with descendants of William Stacy, but no portrait or likeness could be found. Regards, ColWilliam 23:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No picture exists

message: Incorporated biography infobox using the default biography template, which seemed more appropriate than the military template. Regards, ColWilliam 01:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorporated biography infobox

message: This article makes extensive use of "Tory", thus giving it a pro-Revolutionary POV bias.  Since "Tory" was a largely pejorative term (see Tory#American_Revolution), I'd recommend replacing it with the more neutral "Loyalist" (which also has a much better article of its own; see Loyalist (American Revolution)).
===Incorporated recommendation===
Good suggestion. Thank you. ColWilliam 21:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Tory" vs "Loyalist"

message: Good suggestion. Thank you. ColWilliam 21:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorporated recommendation

message: #a proper lead, as a summary has few if any footnotes, this has 22
#needs more on his early life
#is there a painting or sketch of him so we know what he looked like?
#all the google links in the bibliography need cleaned up, have it display words not URLs
#possibly more later
#five days is allotted to act on these issues
Sumoeagle179 20:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As to the refs in the lead, move them to an appropriate spot in the body, don't totally remove them. I should have been clearer. Sumoeagle179 12:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Understood. Refs were retained in the body. ColWilliam 14:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave not here when done.Sumoeagle179 02:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. Thank you for your help. ColWilliam 00:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work.Sumoeagle179 02:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review

message: Thank you very much for your review and comments.
#Removed footnotes in the lead paragraph. ColWilliam 03:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As to the refs in the lead, move them to an appropriate spot in the body, don't totally remove them. I should have been clearer. Sumoeagle179 12:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Understood. Refs were retained in the body. ColWilliam 14:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave not here when done.Sumoeagle179 02:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. Thank you for your help. ColWilliam 00:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work.Sumoeagle179 02:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorporated recommendations

message: Requested a biography peer review for this article. ColWilliam 19:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review 

message: Received automated peer review suggestions here. Suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program. Thank you to APR for this review. ColWilliam 23:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated peer review 

message: Received peer review comments here from editor Awadewit. Thank you to Awadewit for the effort and comments. ColWilliam 23:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editor peer review 

message: Requested a biography A-class review here for this article. ColWilliam (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-class review 

message: This article has been nominated for Version 0.7 of the offline Wikipedia release but did not meet the standards for importance. It has been put on Wikipedia:Release_Version_Nominations/Held_nominations for further review. Please see that page for details.
Article is nice enough on quality, but not quite high enough on importance. Walkerma (talk) 05:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Version 0.7

message: There is a discussion thread on the Joseph Brant talk page regarding the Brant-Stacy incident. If there are additional comments, please do not add comments here on the Stacy talk page; instead, for completeness, please add to the Joseph Brant talk page. Also, there is some limited description within the Cherry Valley massacre article. — ColWilliam (talk) 17:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[William Stacy]] and [[Joseph Brant]] 

message: I think that there might be an error because when I searched "William Stacy" on Google it shows a picture of a police officer and says he's an "American revolutionary", idk how this would be fixed tho because it doesn't seem to be a problem with the wiki but with Google  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.176.74.103 (talk) 00:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  possible error?