Talk:Herbert Aptheker

message: This link:
* Bettina Aptheker's accusations in the Los Angeles Times.
is not directly available. It links to the LA Times archive which, after a further search, charges to read full articles. What is the policy for this sort of thing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgmccue (talk • contribs) 00:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link of little value 

message: I can't find the link that would let me edit the first paragraph.  There Aptheker's Documentary History is described as consisting of three volumes, but the correct number seven.  The New York Times had made that error in its obit and printed a correction shortly after I brought it to the editor's attention, which I recount in "My Communist Mentor" linked at the bottom of the Wiki entry. Anarchristian (talk) 16:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seven volumes, not three 

message: "He was a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse since the 1930s." He published articles in the late '30s and Columbia University published his dissertation in 1943 while he was in the Army in Europe, and that book was reviewed in The Journal of Southern History the following year, but I'm not aware of any evidence that would justify regarding him as prominent in scholarly discourse.  As a target of McCarthy-instigated policies, he won some unwanted notoriety by losing his Army commission (not mentioned in the article) in December of 1950, and even more three years later when he testified at televised hearings on May 6, 1953.  In scholarly discourse I would think that it would be more accurate to say he achieved something like "prominence" during the rise of New Left scholarship in the '60s and '70s, but in any case the phrase in question ("prominent in scholarly discourse") is vague to the point of uselessness.Anarchristian (talk) 13:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prominent in scholarly discourse? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Herbert Aptheker. 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/20070121040559/http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/ to http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070121040559/http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/ to http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070121040559/http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/ to http://hnn.us/roundup/archives/14/2006/10/
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) 18:43, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This recent edit by  consists mostly of good copyedits.  However, it also contains an odd addition: the paragraph about "peonage" seems to have nothing at all to do with Aptheker (it refers to an event that took place 8 years before he was born, and doesn't seem to relate at all to the work of the Abolish Peonage Committee).  (Also the accessdate for the reference is weird.)  Unless there's some concrete connection, I suggest removing it.  (Although it would be nice to get an actual reference into that subsection.)  --100.36.103.248 (talk) 13:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the paragraph on Arkansas and Percy didn't belong; it was just an example of earlier efforts to control peonage. I remembered the Arkansas and Italian worker example, so just picked it up, complete with the old access date. Parkwells (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peonage