Talk:Ralph Flanders

message: User:HopsonRoad 14:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

message: I have done a major augmentation of this article, relying on Flanders's autobiography, "Senator from Vermont," plus other sources. Please review this effort critically, offering additional sources. Additional photographs are requested.
While Flanders has a strong reputation for integrity, one must realize that any autobiography is subject to unconscious self-aggrandizement and lapses of memory, among other issues. Nevertheless, "Senator from Vermont" helps address the major aspects of Flanders's life.HopsonRoad 17:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! Excellent expansion, with quality referencing. Reading this makes me realize that I have got to bump Senator from Vermont  further up the priority scale on my books-to-be-read list. Re the perennial biographical problem of the fact that autobiographies are inherently biased: Then again, they often provide information that is difficult to get anywhere else. Certainly a good autobiography doesn't hurt a balanced biographical effort, even if it is only one component of it. Thanks for improving this article. — Lumbercutter 17:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; very good work. One nice addition would be to use "Harvard" references for the footnotes that all link to "Senator from Vermont." This would allow you to give page numbers for each reference, while still keeping things fairly compact. See Elizabeth Bentley for an example. RedSpruce 21:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the encouragement, everyone. I have footnoted my MS Word working draft with the page numbers, so I could follow RedSpruce's suggestion. I think that I'll let the project lie fallow for a period before assessing that option and see if there are any substantive issues that need addressing.HopsonRoad 01:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

text: There are now many references. I'm open to discussion whether RedSpruce's suggestion to use "Harvard" references for the footnotes that all link to "Senator from Vermont" would still keep things "fairly compact."HopsonRoad 02:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What you have now is very good and can certainly stay as-is. However, the style used at Elizabeth Bentley is even better, because you can cite an individual page number for each citation. But it's up to you, if you have the time to do the converting and supply the page numbers. Even if not, we are still lucky to have all the expanded content that you provided. — Lumbercutter 23:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that Senator From Vermont is available on Questia.com, and I have a subscription there. So if no one has any strenuous objection, I may convert the footnotes myself some time when I have a couple of hours to kill. RedSpruce 20:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection here. However, since my MS Word drafts have the page numbers already annotated, you might want to give me until 31 October to do the conversion and then follow up with a check for accuracy. I appreciate your interest in and support of this page.HopsonRoad 23:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do. I don't know when I'd get to it, and Questia's text search isn't working right now anyway (grrrr). RedSpruce 23:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's been a death in my family, so I'll need a week's extension. HopsonRoad 22:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to hear that. Condolences. — Lumbercutter 02:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update of article 

message: There's a popular misconception that McCarthy was censured, however this is historically incorrect. The resolution in question can be found here.Although the title here refers to the action as a "censure", the resolution itself states "condemned". Unless someone presents something to the contrary, I'm changing this aspect of the article. Jtpaladin 00:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although the actual resolution used the word "condemned" rather than "censured," no historians place any significance on the distinction. Historians and Senate documents (see here, for example) generally refer to it as a "censure." And in any case, the word "censure" was used in Flanders' original motion. RedSpruce 10:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you could produce a reliable secondary source that states that McCarthy was not "censured", or states that there is any real significance to the use of the word "condemned" rather than "censured," then you might have a case for the edits you've been making on this subject here and elsewhere. The Herman biography passage you have used doesn't qualify; it describes some McCarthy-supporting senators saying that there is, or might be, some significance to the word, and other senators dismissing the argument as laughable. Your attempts to avoid the simple and factual statement that Flanders "introduced the ultimately successful motion to have McCarthy censured" is an insertion of POV that is contrary the writings of reliable sources. RedSpruce 15:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  McCarthy not "censured", but "condemned" 

message: In the next day or three, I plan to make two passes at this article: First to incorporate style improvements suggested by a non-Wicki reviewer and second to implement Harvard-style references.HopsonRoad 14:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work! I've done some tinkering and cleaning up. When you click on a Harvard reference footnote, like "^ Flanders 1961, p. 194", it's supposed to hop you down the page to the full information on that book, and that currently isn't working with all the footnotes. The multiple "Flanders 1909" books is confusing it, for one thing. I'll probably tinker some more later. RedSpruce 15:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your inspiration and help, RedSpruce. Is there a way to make the Notes into two columns (I've seen and lost track of a system that works for Mozilla)? Alternatively, since the notes can be reached by clicking to and fro the text, would it be preferable for them to follow the References?  I'd next like to get a peer review after the dust has settled on cleaning up the piece. Sincerely, HopsonRoad 16:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Using "" (which is used since my edit) puts the footnotes in 2 columns on the current FireFox and Safari 3, though not on Safari 2.x or IE 6.x. Putting footnotes before References seems to be the standard format on WP, though I'm not sure of that, or if there's some style guideline on that. RedSpruce 17:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your fixes are most helpful. Thank you. I couldn't find any examples of References before Notes either in guidelines or practice. Now that the Notes jump to the Reference properly, it's less of an issue. HopsonRoad 20:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I wrote my review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Ralph Flanders. Simply awesome! — Lumbercutter 00:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Further upgrade of article

message: You are invited to leave your peer review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Ralph Flanders.—HopsonRoad 12:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review invitation 

message: I have expanded the lead paragraph and made extensive wordsmithing changes throughout, based on the peer review. Please review my replies to the peer reviews at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Ralph Flanders.—HopsonRoad (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Update, based on peer reviews

message: The automated review of this article found at Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated/November 2007#Requests#Ralph Flanders makes makes the following suggestion that I request your input on: "Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article."
Review of the guidance suggests that this article has grown to where a two-paragraph lead would be appropriate. I'm prepared to do this, pending your input. HopsonRoad 12:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of lead paragraph? 

message: OK, I hesitated to add two cents to this discussion, but here goes: After reading Bdell's analogy (about Hitler, evil, and animal cruelty) on his user page, I think that we can successfully address his point here about "if not B, then not A" thinking. What he is pointing out is this: Just because McCarthyism was a witchhunt doesn't mean that there weren't Soviet agents compromising the U.S. government. (This is somewhat analogous to the quote that "Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you.") Maybe we could solve the whole problem by saying something to this effect: "Flanders moved to censure McCarthy because he had turned a legitimate fear of Soviet penetration and domestic communist subversion into a libelous witchhunt." — ¾-10 02:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I note that you gentlemen indicate an appreciation for a subtle but important perspective held by most professional historians.  See Radosh, Haynes and Klehr, for example, who wrote in 1998 that "if Americans are ever going to understand their history, it is essential that McCarthyism and anti-Communism be disentangled," and John Earl Haynes' elaboration at http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page58.html.  One could also note comments by Sam Tanenhaus and David Oshinsky in this respect.Bdell555 (talk) 16:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: While it might not be relevant (since material that merits inclusion should not be excluded just because it is likely to be challenged), I'd note that your reading is less likely to be disputed, HopsonRoad, since you indicate that "Flanders felt ... [there was] a real communist threat" as opposed to claiming that there was "a real communist threat" regardless of whether Flanders felt that or not.  In any case, I would not object to either your proposal or 3/4's.Bdell555 (talk) 18:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Your revision sounds fine to me. — ¾-10 23:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: We can successfully address Bdell's point about "if not B, then not A" thinking

message: There has been a lengthy discussion of the word, "sensational," as appropriate to the lead section of Joseph McCarthy in Talk:Joseph McCarthy#alleged POV wording in intro. The result has been adding a footnote to explain the appropriateness of an apparently loaded word. That word was included in Ralph Flanders, but deleted as part of the discussion with Bdell, above. In the McCarthy article, the word was shown to be appropriate in a footnote, as follows: “Sensational” is a frequently used term by chroniclers of McCarthy. See, for example:  where it is used ten times and  where it is used three times.
I propose to bring it back, as follows:
===Proposed revised paragraph in Ralph Flanders lead===
Flanders was noted for introducing a 1954 motion in the Senate to censure Senator Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy had made sensational claims that there were large numbers of Communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers inside the  federal government and elsewhere. He used his Senate committee as a nationally televised forum for attacks on individuals whom he accused. Flanders felt that McCarthy’s attacks distracted the nation from a much greater threat of Communist successes elsewhere in the world and that they had the effect of creating division and confusion within the United States, to the advantage of its enemies. Ultimately, McCarthy's tactics and his inability to substantiate his claims led to his being discredited and censured by the United States Senate. 
====Footnotes====
===Input below===
I solicit your input. Sincerely, --User:HopsonRoad 04:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putting "sensational" back in the lead 

message: I solicit your input. Sincerely, --User:HopsonRoad 04:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Input below

message: Too much McCarthy crept back in the lead. This wound up being summarized for the portal that Flanders was driven from office because he couldn't substantiate his claim against McCarthy!!!!
Really need to shorten this so it is Flanders oriented not McCarthy-oriented. "Flanders submitted motion. The Senate agreed with him (ptr to McCarthy article)." Student7 (talk) 01:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sensational lead?

message: I've reviewed the article, it was really interesting, about someone I'd never really read much information about.
Quick overview - 
# It is well written. In this respect:  A few minor tweaks I've detailed below
# It is factually accurate and verifiable.  Looks good! Only quibble is listed below.
# It is broad in its coverage.  Very broad and well covered.
# It is neutral; that is, it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias. 
# It is stable;  No recent edit wars
# It is illustrated, where possible and appropriate  Only quibble is below, but it's not enough to fail the article.
In more detail:
* General notes—Wikilinking years. Be consistent. I lean towards not linking dates that are by themselves, but either way, the whole article should be consistent.
: All years in the form of 19XX have been changed to 19XX. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have bolstered highlights of Flanders’s career with references from the Vermont Encyclopedia. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Images come from long out of print books. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I have added more support from his autobiography. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I have combined sentences in a similar manner to that suggested. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The suggestion is consistent with MoS. --User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Made the link.--User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Made smoother language.--User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Eliminated what was intended as a tie between the Cold War and McCarthyism. Retitled and promoted subsections on those topics.--User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your helpful suggestions, Ealdgyth. I hope that you will find these responsive. If you see any other issues, please feel free to be bold and do edits that you feel are appropriate.--User:HopsonRoad 01:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination

message: Just an idle question for anyone with an interest in Flanders genealogy: Talk:Walter Flanders#Cousins?. — ¾-10 18:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cousins?

message: Under the Legacy heading, I propose to add the following:
In his May 24, 2001 speech announcing his departure from the Republican Party, Vermont Senator James Jeffords cited Flanders three times and spoke of him as one of five Vermont politicians who, “spoke their minds, often to the dismay of their party leaders, and did their best to guide the party in the direction of those fundamental principles they believed in.”    In speeches to Georgetown University Law Center and Johnson State College, Senator Patrick Leahy cited Flanders as one of three Vermont politicians who showed, “the importance of standing firm in your beliefs,” “that conflict need not be hostile or adversarial”  
  and who, “rose up against abuses, against infringements upon Americans' rights when doing that was not popular.”  
   
User:HopsonRoad 02:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sound pro-Flanders, as it is supposed to sound! :) Student7 (talk) 13:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Support, because it helps to show the continuing relevance of this article's subject, but does so in a neutral way (quotes both [ex-]Repub and Dem without endorsing either). — ¾-10 03:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continued Influence on Vermont Political Thought 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ralph Flanders. 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/20071005223330/http://members.localnet.com/~jeflan/evf/rflandersmccarthy.html to http://members.localnet.com/~jeflan/evf/rflandersmccarthy.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) 06:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ralph Flanders. 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/20080804122410/http://www.jsc.edu/NewsAndEvents/NewsArchive/2007-2008NewsArchive/LeahyCommencementAddress.aspx to http://www.jsc.edu/NewsAndEvents/NewsArchive/2007-2008NewsArchive/LeahyCommencementAddress.aspx
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) 21:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified