Talk:Thomas R. Marshall

message: I know TRM went to Wabash--but to study law?  AFAIK, it's never had a law program, even pre-law....
161.32.47.33 (talk) 02:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wabash College 

message: "Marshall's decision not to seek the presidential nomination in 1920 was the last time, until 2008, in which neither an incumbent president nor his vice president had entered the electoral race toward the end of his term."
That is not correct neither Calvin Coolidge nor Charles G Dawes sought the Republican nomination in 1928.--220.237.12.60 (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calvin Coolidge 

message: So they win the same states.  For this reason, this line:  "It was also the first presidential election ever in which the incumbent vice president won all the states won by the incumbent president, something that has since become the norm when a president seeks reelection" seems exceedingly unlikely to me.  Could whoever added it please add a citation or take it out?GreekParadise (talk) 00:33, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the key word there is "incumbent". —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 12:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:   Presidents and Vice Presidents Have Run Together Since 1808.  

message: What is the basis for referring to Marshall's proposed constitution as "socialist" or organizing the state "on a socialist basis"?  It was a progressive constitution perhaps (with its inclusion of initiative and referendum, which were standard demands of the Progressive movement of that era), but socialist?  Where did Marshall call either himself or his proposed constitution "socialist"?
Zachary Klaas (talk) 01:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Socialist is the term used by the source. It also refers to it as "hoplessly flawed", and in large part unconsitutional because of the representation reorganization could be conisdered a non-republican form of government. Progressive ideaolgy of time was in large part socialist. The state Democrat party had not realigned along progressive-conservative lines at the time of the consitution. The state Republican already had split up over it (allowing Marshall's election).  Minimum wage, mandatory welfare spending, consitutional protections for labor unions - those are a few of the items the source uses to describe it as socialist. Maintianing male only voting rights, prohibition, primary elections, initiatives, and referedums, were also among the other items included.  —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 12:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socialist constitution? 

message: I am not sure what to do about adding Marshall's adopted son to the article. He never officially adopted the boy, but he took care of him most of his life, and the two are buried next to each other. So while not legally his son, he was adopted by Marshall in every other sense of the word. I am thinking that I will add it to the infobox and note it as adopted, and then footnote an explanation. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 15:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have located a source that claims Thomas Riley Marsall is the great grandson of John Marshall. I cannot find anything to confirm this. Does anyone know the awnser? —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 18:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morrisson Izzy Marshall 

message: After reviewing the article I would say it reads very well, however the content between Ref 64 and 65 appears in need of more detail.  I don't care for the phrase "trivial issues", and the over reliance on one reference.  Recommend these trivial issues be provided or the sentence deleted.  --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 14:48, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! I have added some more detail about the exact bills, provided an additional reference, and rephrased the sentance about "trivial issues". —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 17:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article review

message: In the Humor section, the following appears without follow-up: "Some of his public utterances in 1913, in which he appeared to advocate radical ideas in regard to the inheritance of property, caused much criticism." The source given is simply Encyclopedia Americana, which doesn't contain any elaboration as to what radical ideas were implied (I don't know offhand what kind of inheritance law would be seen as "radical") or any quotes from Marshall. Does anyone have more information or further sourcing on this? SamuelRiv (talk) 13:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would recommend we just delete it. Better to remove it if we cannot find a good source and maintain the quality of the article. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 20:46, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radical ideas on inheritance 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Thomas R. Marshall. 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/20070819003544/http://www.quaylemuseum.org/Vice_Presidency/Indiana_Five.htm to http://www.quaylemuseum.org/Vice_Presidency/Indiana_Five.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) 04:07, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion