![]() | BrooksâBaxter War has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is lacking reference. There are now plenty of online sources to reference in google books. Here are a few I've found:
http://books.google.com/books?id=H80eQweo0V4C&pg=PA103&dq=brooks+baxter+war&ei=4acqSoPNCYXeNZeXkP4G#PPA104,M1
http://books.google.com/books?id=o7sRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA327&dq=brooks+baxter+war&ei=4acqSoPNCYXeNZeXkP4G
http://books.google.com/books?id=jIEQr2ZLLhoC&pg=PA24&dq=brooks+baxter+war&ei=4acqSoPNCYXeNZeXkP4G
http://books.google.com/books?id=6Aej-sXoQLYC&pg=PA261&dq=brooks+baxter+war&ei=4acqSoPNCYXeNZeXkP4G
http://books.google.com/books?id=eenSh9eVjw8C&pg=PA35&dq=brooks+baxter+war&lr=&ei=LK8qSpOTCJC8M4Cy9IUH
http://books.google.com/books?id=DnnnYn-qD4sC&pg=PA23&dq=brooks+baxter+war&lr=&ei=LK8qSpOTCJC8M4Cy9IUH
http://books.google.com/books?id=eAYuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA181&dq=brooks+baxter+war&lr=&ei=LK8qSpOTCJC8M4Cy9IUH#PPA208,M1
http://books.google.com/books?id=wXxFBMArgRUC&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=%22Joseph+Brooks%22+Arkansas&source=bl&ots=ID8kbnmHL0&sig=IJlcWQ2AxLQfzST37-WZRxfWBqs&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22Joseph%20Brooks%22%20Arkansas&f=false http://www.archive.org/stream/letushavepeace00root/letushavepeace00root_djvu.txt âPreceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.48.64 ( talk) 20:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Need:
1868 Arkansas constitution
--
The_stuart (
talk)
18:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that there was nothing in the article about the state being forbidden from deficit spending due partially to the conflict, so I added the last paragraph. -- 206.255.185.237 03:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, but you're incorrect. There has NEVER been a provision in the Arkansas Constitution of 1874 banning deficit spending by the STATE (though Amendment 1 repudiated the Holford Bonds in the 1880's). Although the 1874 Constitution DID try to ban deficit spending by cities and counties, even that was ineffective until Amendment 10 in 1924 expressly banned local deficits. State deficit spending IS banned by law, however, though it was ignored until the first Revenue Stabilization Law was passed in 1945; those laws have effectively ended deficit spending by cutting cash flow to state agencies during budgetary shortfalls. -- 70.232.40.250 05:32, January 27, 2006 (UTC)
I have added a lot of stuff to this article. I used large portion of a research paper I did on the war for one of my college courses. You can read that paper here. -- The_stuart 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
At the moment, this article has no chance. Below is a list of the more obvious problems. Once these are fixed, bring it back to GA and renominate it, but don't come back without having them done as the article will just fail all over again.
Please give this article a thorough copyedit and clean up the sourcing before bringing it back to GA.-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 14:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The article relies heavily on only a couple of sources and period journalism; some third-party scholarly sources would be useful for perspective.-- Parkwells ( talk) 19:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Based on reading even AR Encyclopedia articles, the reliance on Gazette makes this seriously flawed and POV. I've started to rewrite it with additional material and cites, but it needs more work. -- Parkwells ( talk) 21:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I was messing with the references and something weird happened. It appears to have captured one of the old quotes I pulled out of microfilm. I've played with it a while and can't figure out what the problem is, may be someone else can. -- The_stuart ( talk) 02:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer ( talk) 20:34, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
This article has quite a few issues with referencing that need to be addressed. Because of this, I have not yet thoroughly examined the article for prose, POV or coverage. When the referencing issues have been mostly taken care of, I will begin my review of the remaining issues. I will be watchlisting this page, and please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer ( talk) 20:57, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Separate page numbers needed:
FALSE: == References == Driggs, Orval (1943). Issues of the Clayton Regime. Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas. CORRECT: ==References== ===Citations=== Driggs 1943, p. 29 Driggs 1943, pp. 54â55 ===Bibliography === Driggs, Orval (1943). Issues of the Clayton Regime. Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas.
Another thing, please try to find a parallel source for these: "The Daily Arkansas Gazette. #101. March 19, 1871". Since these old newspapers are impossible to verify. Peltimikko ( talk) 18:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for taking so long, here are my final comments on this article to make it ready for GA status.
Once these things have been taken care of, this article should be good to go for GA status. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer ( talk) 23:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
As I was going through the bibliography, Sandy archived the thread. The article has merit, it is just not up to snuff yet. The citations were difficult to follow, although i fixed the Appleton's cites. The newspaper articles need proper citation (paper (location), article, date, page). See the MOS for specific citation styles. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 00:14, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I suspect that the clear POV running through this article merely reflects the POV of the sources; really, one should not write on Reconstruction with sources dating only up to 1922. For more, see my comments at FAC. If one must use contemporary sources, at least balance them; isn't the Chicago Tribune available on line? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
-- The_stuart ( talk) 22:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
The article states that "Baxter's forces, all white Democrats, continued to grow steadily during the conflict..." There's an interesting primary source contradicting this in the Work Project Administration's "Slave Narratives: a Folk History of Slavery in the United States", in the interview of R.B. Anderson, cf. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/11255/11255-h/11255-h.htm#AndersonRB where he (as a contemporary witness to events) describes African-Americans fighting on both sides of the conflict, and seems (on my reading) to take Baxter's side: "I remember the King White fooled a lot of niggers and armed them and brought them up here. The niggers and Republicans here fought them and run them back where they come from." -- Benjamin Rosenbaum, 16:36, 29. August 212 (UTC)
If he is relevant at all it should be mentioned that Republicans both supported and voted for the 1965 voting rights act, and that he wasn't a segregationist; far from it he defeated the segregationist James Johnson. Many people even consider the democratic nominee who faced Rockefeller to have been one of the last viable segregationist politicians; his defeat was the end of an era and start of a new one; not an endorsement of segregation.
I will edit it right now to reflect historical accuracy, the defeat of one of the last segregationists was not a victory for segregation and the article shouldn't pretend it is. â Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.56.186.182 ( talk) 22:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:BrooksâBaxter War/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I've made some corrections of my own, but I haven't the time nor interest to give this article proper attention. That and I can say I had no knowledge of the event in question before seeing this article today. Anyway, I don't think it's quite up to A-class par yet. It's very well developed content-wise, though it needs more copy-editing. I noted and corrected a half-dozen typos and grammatical quirks in the opening paragraph alone. Can't say as far as references go, though at the very least there appeared to be frequent citations for the most part. Lastly, it probably needs someone more familiar with the manual of style guidelines to go through it.
|
Last edited at 16:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 10:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on BrooksâBaxter War. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on BrooksâBaxter War. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:01, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on BrooksâBaxter War. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on BrooksâBaxter War. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:07, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
We really need to reconsider some of the highly biased and derogatory terms in this article. Especially since these rhetorical terms were developed by those using the political machinery to exclude African-Americans from voting and the terms exist to justify and normalize this exclusion of African-Americans from political participation. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 21:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)