Talk:James Wilson (Founding Father)

message: It doesn't appear to be from a late 19th Cen. EB, but it sure reads like one.  How do we all feel about trimming it back a bit?  I'm sure he's fascinating, but I think the prose might be a bit too elevated (and I still suspect either an uncredited pd source or else a copyvio, though I can't prove it). Jwrosenzweig 23:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anyone find this a bit too POV?

message: Edit by Christopher M. Vanderwall-Brown
Well for one, James Wilson was a key founding father; most people just don't have a clue who he is. Secondly, had it not been for, it was either Franklin Roosevelt or Theodore, anyhow, they were so enthralled with the legacy that was James Wilson he was moved from his simple burial ground, and given the honor he deserved with his fellow framers. I myself am a seventh generation descendant of Wilson. I don't deny he had an incredible ambition about him. His infamy is another thing I cannot deny. He on many occasions would have to flee his home, first from the British, and then from the Americans themselves, after his plan to move people west fell through, and thus defaulting on all his loans. I believe he escaped to Virginia or Ohio, that part was a little sketchy, it's been a few years since I've read the law review or talked to my father who is the real family expert on Wilson. In any case, he was one of the most important founding father, most if you are considering the constitution, for as the law review explicitly states, (written by Roosevelt himself) that Wilson's ideas were key to the framing of the country in which we now live. Had it not been for Wilson, America would have looked dramatically different. Also, it's interesting to note, there are at least a few descendants floating around from his seven children. We are few in number, vast in infa
my, and decisive in purpose. Most of the key information about Wilson that I know comes from said law review, Wilson never wrote much over the course of his own life, he instead focused on the legacy he would leave behind to a nation, and to his own children. Also, around the time most founding father’s were doing the majority of their writing Wilson was either evading the law be it the Red Coats or American Blues. Washington on several occasions was required to save his life from Red Coasts and bankers trying to exact their revenge. And no, it is not POV, it is merely honesty. If you have a problem with the truth then that's fine, be that way. America was founded on those ideals and will not be changed just because someone has a problem with that. It's called a democratic republic, ruled by the people not by dictators sir; therefore I feel shortening the truth is uncalled for. In addition, if you wish to shorten Wilson, then we must in turn shorten the entirety of the framers of our constitution. Finally, did you ever think that someone besides yourself could be a good writer? I don't know you, I'm just honestly replying to a random post, but I've read the limited material in existence about Wilson, there honestly is a vast lack of information about him, possibly due to Wilson or the family's efforts to conceal the embarrassment of his life. My father was the first person to actually hear the story of his entire family, curious family member A. tells curious family member B. all about it. But what I'm trying to point out is, is it not possibly the author spent a long time writing this, in addition, that said person might in fact be a college professor or a very well educated person? I may be a freshman in college, but I am not a dunce. If anything Wilson gave us sir, it happened to be brains. Something you perhaps are lacking in great degrees for complaining about length and openly accusing someone of a crime you have no valid proof exists on a public website. We live in a free society and country sir, and free speech is protected, however, the Supreme Court does not consider slander to be a lawful form of said speech. (Dragoon91786 09:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer

message: This is article has an incredible NPOV problem. It should be totally rewritten. It hurts to have an article like this in wikipedia.<<Coburn_Pharr>> 21:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I pointed out above this is not POV...this is truth, therefore your comments are invalid. You just have a problem with honesty. Try reading a book on Wilson and you might learn a thing or two. Might I suggest Wilson's own works or perhaps the law review I suggested, you can contact the Library of Congress, there are a few copies lying around. I was fortunatly able to get ahold on one of the last copies, WSU has one, however I'm not sure who else. Well, the Library of Congress does, but depenting on the state you live in, it might difficult to get your hands on. In any case, as I have noted before, before you call an artical verbose and unimportant, remember, this is perhaps the only public record of any complete nature availible to the public, without a vast supply of travel. So unless you can cite, and I repeat cite specific examples of inaccuracies, please refrain from commenting slander, or random faulsifications. Thank you. The intention of this website is in acordance with the pantheon of ideals that the halls of learning in any good civilization possess. Therefore, I highly suspect you truly have no real concept of what you are talking about. But this is a free country, so besides defending the page, there is nothing else I can possibly due. (Dragoon91786 09:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, just in case someone has some less than ideal comments they wish to make about my connection to Wilson, and the possibility of bias as a result, be assured, I do not deny being a six/seventh generation descendent of Wilson. However, I am fully willing to discuss in full detail to the best of my ability all of his less than illustrious deviations in life. Therefore, in so doing, I am not bias. I know the man was brash, egotistical, and in many cases, a complete wash when it came to common sense, he had big dreams and even bigger achievements. But the one thing you can say for Wilson was he knew his stuff. He may have been a fool at times, possibly a megalomaniac, but hey, I admit a bit of it runs in the family, but I do believe in all my heart, he had the best intentions for this nation, and albeit the road to hell is paved with good intentions, without them, we would not have this glorious nation we live in today. (Dragoon91786 10:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: It is shameful that the Wikipedia article for such an important figure in American history as James Wilson should be of such low quality. Parts of it look plagiarized to me, which is particularly distasteful when we are writing of someone who helped draft the US Constitution. Compare . There is no grace to the article...no balance. And what is with the constant juvenile vandalism?! They must be assigning this in junior high history courses somewhere!
Regarding British versus American English, I normally leave British spellings unchanged. However, for a uniquely American topic, I think it is appropriate to change to American. Ironically, where one should not change it is when the subject himself uses British spellings (!)...so I left the British "instil" in the Wilson quote, trusting that whoever added that to the article was faithful in copying the original.
Also note this reference in current news, , regarding the "discovery" in the archives of the Philadelphia Historical Society of a draft of the Constitution written in Wilson's handwriting.
Taquito1 (talk) 03:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  High Importance, Low Quality 

message: Something like this: James Wilson born 17xx in died 18xx was one of the founding fathers. A highly respected lawyer who trained at xx University he served in the continental congress, wrote the first draft of the constitution, and was a justice of the supreme court. Nitpyck (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, yes, that makes so much more sense. When so much of the article is bad, where better to improve it than the beginning? Of course, almost anything will be an improvement. This article has all the hallmarks of having no one that cares about it, not even that Mr. Christopher M. Vanderwall-Brown, so I would just edit directly without prior consultation on this talk page. If anyone objects, they can take their turn. Thanks! Taquito1 (talk) 01:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the lede? 

message: It seems to me that the Fort Wilson Riot should have its own article, given that several important men of the time, including Charles Willson Peale, were involved on one side or the other, and there is considerably more to the story than is given here. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fort Wilson Riot 

message: Somebody recently changed James Wilson's religious affiliation from "Unitarian" to "Christian."  I changed it to "Episcopal" per the following website: Religious Affiliation of the U.S. Supreme Court.  I don't know if the tag at the beginning of the article should be footnoted, and I don't know if this is a reliable source, but I suppose it's a place to start.  Right now the article doesn't say anything about Wilson's religious views; perhaps a new section should be added.  --Other Choices (talk) 00:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Wilson's religious affiliation 

message: As this is about an American, why are the dates written British-style?? Very annoying. 
Last I looked, Wikipedia was an American, not British, website.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CF99:1470:A448:4FED:77BA:F96 (talk) 03:07, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on James Wilson. 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/20150710163946/http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/Signers/wilson.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/signers/wilson.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150710163946/http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/Signers/wilson.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/signers/wilson.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) 15:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Wilson. 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/20051109210539/http://www.law.upenn.edu/about/history/photogallery/Insidegallery/wilson.html to http://www.law.upenn.edu/about/history/photogallery/Insidegallery/wilson.html
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) 11:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:James Wilson (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 10:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: I think it's a bit odd for the title of the article to include the parenthetical "Founding Father." The term has a sentimental connotation. It is celebratory, as opposed to scholarly. If we do need a parenthetical descriptor, I think "lawyer," "jurist," or "politician" would be better choices. This is not to be anti-Wilson, I think he's a cool guy.
: It is rather difficult to find a disambiguator for the common combination of given name and surname, "James" and "Wilson", which would not conflict with another lawyer, jurist, or politician. BD2412 T 00:25, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Since an easily recognizable disambiguator does not exist under Wilson's lawyer, jurist, or politican endeavors, the present title seems an adequate and accurate descriptor. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The label "Founding Father"