Talk:Abraham Lincoln/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

POV in the intro

I removed some stuff that just seemed to be written from a very anti-Lincoln perspective. It wasn't neutral. --Revolución hablar ver 14:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Adding a creative / fun link

I just created an Abe Lincoln Mad Lib based on your article. If you think it might be funny to others, feel free to add it to the links, otherwise, forget I ever was here!

Abraham Lincoln Mad Lib —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.233.38.152 (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

1946?

why is abraham's lincoln early life to 1946? someone should fix that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 167.176.6.8 (talk • contribs). of 12.07.07

Fixed it it is 1854. Thanks. --Bhadani (talk) 18:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

National Union Party reference

I am thinking that this article would be more accurate by stating somewhere within the first inroductory paragraphs that Lincoln was the 1864 presidential candidate of the National Union Party (United States) (a political collaboration with "War Democrats") and elected to his second term in office as a National Unionist.

Lincoln also died not as a Republican, but as a National Unionist as well...4.129.71.205 19:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

famous dream?

From the article:

Without his main bodyguard Ward Hill Lamon, to whom he related his famous dream regarding his own assassination...

Sounds interesting. Authoritative? (redacting blacklisted URL during reversion)

article content copied to yahoo.answers

Looks like someone copied the article and pasted it here: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070404222751AAwTJUR

image = Lincoln with Inscription.jpg

This text: image = Lincoln with Inscription.jpg, is obviously accidentally inserted right before the last line of the article. Needs to be removed.

• Yep! Thanks! --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Depression

How come there is no mention of the fact that Lincoln suffered from depression most of his life? There is ample evidence of this. He had a couple breakdowns in his life and was even suicidal. I think it would just be helpful to know that throughout his life he dealt with a lot of mental anguish, even while doing great things.MJKent 17:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I give you the same answer I give every "How come there is no mention of ..." question I run across:

Because nobody's gone there yet. If you can type, and have sources you can cite, and can work within Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and standards, then you have good contributions to make and I urge you to go to it!  :)

That is what Wikipedia is all about. --7Kim 05:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

POV section title

Mexican American War to Anti War Activist? You decide. I don't edit here but watch and it seems the change has been made. I won't edit war, so I am not reverting it again, but you can discuss it here if needed. IvoShandor 07:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Letter from Greeley and its Missing Section

Although I realize that the missing portion may not be directly relevant to the section of the article in question, it is pretty common practice for people who want to mischaracterize Lincoln to do so by quoting only the portion of the letter in question which is quoted in this article.

I feel like the last sentence (which clarifies that the above words described only his official position and not his actual beliefs) should be included somewhere as well. Kevinatilusa

Lincoln in art and popular culture

It looks like this article is locked, Under Lincoln in art and popular culture I would like to add the fact that The Simpsons writer Mike Reiss created a parody Flash cartoon of Abraham Lincoln for Icebox.com called Hard Drinkin' Lincoln where President Lincoln is portrayed as an Alcoholic, Irish hating, public masturbator who is shot in the head in each episode by John Wilkes Booth. 68.160.106.24 02:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Very long link.

Resolved

Is there any chance that we can get another reliable source besides this link? It makes it hard for me to see the difference on revisions, when there are changes close to the location of this link. TheBlazikenMaster 16:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind that. A new feature takes care of this anyway. TheBlazikenMaster 21:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Bicentennial coverage

Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois will be engaging in Lincoln bicentennial celebration and events starting in February 2008. Perhaps this should be covered here? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 22:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Criticism section

Does this seem out of place since its only one line and one source?? Thanks --Tom 18:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree that a one sentence section that says, basically, Lincoln was a racist but so was everybody else back then is really out of place. There is a separate article on Letrone Bennett (the source footnoted) under the general category of Abraham Lincoln, and a separate article on Lincoln and slavery as well as the Lincoln-Douglas debate -- all better places to discuss the nuances of Lincoln's views on race. I've gone ahead and deleted the section. Tom (North Shoreman) 19:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent and thanks! --Tom 19:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I propose the section is brought back and expanded upon. And believe me you, I can DEFINETLY expand upon it --Darrin (Thorsmitersaw) Sept. 27 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Marriage and Family

I changed the section back to its original title -- this was changed with no explanation offered but it was apparently another attempt to provide a prominent cross reference to the Sexuality article. That article as it stands has little or nothing to do with either Lincoln's marriage or family and the cross reference placed there was inappropriate. The current section of this article does not discuss Lincoln's marriage other than name who his wife was. Tom (North Shoreman) 17:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Religious and philosophical beliefs

I rewrote the section to include both religious and philosophical beliefs rather than strictly religious. I included the ideas of Miller, Wilson, Guelzo, and Jaffa who are among the leading historians today exploring Lincoln's intellectual and moral life, with emphasis on how it effected Lincoln's public life. I purposefully eliminated specific references to what Lincoln read and church he belonged to. I think that once that door is opened, this section would need to be vastly expanded in order to discuss the matter more fully. There is a separate article on Lincoln's religious beliefs that is better suited to go into those details and arguments. Tom (North Shoreman) 16:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Dakota comment

In section Fighting begins: 1861–1862 / Domestic measures, there is a sentence that reads, "Presented with 303 death warrants for convicted Santee Dakota who had massacred innocent farmers, Lincoln affirmed 39 of these for execution (one was later reprieved)." The latter part, which details Lincoln's specific involvement and influence, seems appropriate. But as there is a link to the Sioux Uprising article in the preceding sentence, the detail "who had massacred innocent farmers" seems like an insidious detail (of what kind I need not specify). After all, why make an uncited judgement when the sentence already identifies that those Santee Dakota were "convicted" and when the sentence provides a link to more details? I will not edit, but I suggest that "who had massacred innocent farmers" is ommitted to keep focus.--24.13.242.3 16:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Blacklisted URL deleted

Due to a series of vandalism edits from an IP editor, I reverted this talk page to the last good version, from Deskana on 1 June 2007. However, I had to delete a URL in the "famous dream" section because it was blacklisted. You'll need to check the history if you have a need to access it. Sorry. Horologium t-c 05:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Smallpox is Missing!

The article is missing Abraham Lincoln's case of smallpox in year 1863!

Articles:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273560,00.html

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_healthblog/2007/05/lincoln_had_sma.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18727435/

Ready to be featured for the second time?

It seems well sourced, currently has no maintance tags. So I'm asking is it ready to be re-featured? I'm not an expert, so that's why I'm asking you guys first before nominating it. I will nominate it tomorrow, first I need to know if it's a good idea. TheBlazikenMaster 22:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I don’t think it’s ready. A main reason for its downgrade in October 2006 was the lack of footnotes. While the number has more than doubled, there are still some sections where footnotes are needed (i.e. the sections on “secession winter” and “fighting begins”). The March 2007 rejection of GA status suggested working toward 100 footnotes and while this seems arbitrary, there are certainly areas where more footnotes would help, especially considering this is a controversial subject (although I think the article’s NPOV is its strongpoint). The references section should probably be broken down into sources actually used and further reading and the manner of listing them should be consistent (i.e. some authors are listed last name first while others aren’t, some include publishers or ISBNs and others don’t). There are works listed in the footnotes that apparently aren’t in the bibliographical section.

The following paragraph from lede to the article:

Lincoln's leadership qualities were evident in his close supervision of the victorious war effort, especially in his selection of Ulysses S. Grant and other top generals. Historians conclude he brilliantly handled the factions of the Republican Party by bringing the leaders into his cabinet and forcing them to cooperate. In crisis management, he defused a war scare with the United Kingdom (1861), he outmaneuvered the Confederacy and took control of the border slave states in 1861-62, and he managed his own landslide reelection in the 1864 presidential election.

is a fine paragraph but it is not supported in the main body of the article. Giving the issues raised in this paragraph proper attention would require quite a bit of new writing and leaving the paragraph out would leave a significant gap in the article. Other areas need more attention (i.e. no reference at all to the Cooper Union speech, no mention of troubles with Fremont and Hunter, very little on Mary Todd Lincoln, too little on the election of 1864). Tom (North Shoreman) 23:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Al right then. Good point. Sometime in the past I idioticly nominated featured articles when they weren't ready, that's why I'm from now on just asking via talkpages first. TheBlazikenMaster 00:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Early life and career

Lincoln's law career, especially his connection with railroad litigation, is an important part of his life and development and needs to be treated with some detail in the main article. I have restored the 2-3 paragraphs that were deleted and could serve as an introduction to the separate article. The separate article on his early life and career was created simply by cutting and pasting from the main article -- nobody has done much to expand it and as it stands it serves no real purpose. Tom (North Shoreman) 23:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

So why don't you nominate that particular article to WP:AFD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBlazikenMaster (talk • contribs)

I certainly won't object if someone wants to do it, but personally I imagine at some point in the next year I might want to expand it myself. Tom (North Shoreman) 23:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Next year? I think it's too long time. But don't rush yourself though, just do it when you feel like it. I personally don't care if or when this will happen. But I still suggest that waiting til next year is ridiculous. TheBlazikenMaster 19:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

"especially economic liberalism"

Lincoln’s religious skepticism was fueled by his exposure to the ideas of the Lockean Enlightenment and classical liberalism, especially economic liberalism. - would it be too much to ask for a citation of the relevant text in the claimed source? This seems like propaganda. 75.183.8.246 03:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you go to the actual source referenced (there is a footnote there) if it seems like "propaganda" to you. I have summarized in one sentence what is covered in three rather long paragraphs and have no intention of transcribing them here. Partial quotes which do not capture the complete context are, "The second of these contexts was the Lockean Enlightenment, which made Lincoln religiously skeptical ..." and "The last of these concepts was classical liberalism, especially the economic liberalism ... ." What facts and sources do you base your opinion on that this is "propaganda"? Tom (North Shoreman) 12:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

In "Early Life" the sentence following the first paragraph should probably not be there.

Got it -- thanks. Tom (North Shoreman) 18:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Photograph of Abraham Lincoln's Second Inauguration

The caption you have under the photo of Lincoln's Second Inauguration is unproven. This is particularly true of Ned Spangler who was never shown to even know Booth's coconspirators let alone hang out with them. Please see my web page at http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton1/Lincoln64.html

"It should be noted that many Lincoln assassination experts do not agree with the Kunhardts’ analysis of this photograph. For example, in The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies, Dr. William Hanchett writes, "In Twenty Days (1865), Dorothy Meserve Kunhardt and Philip B. Kunhardt, Jr., have combined hundreds of magnificently reproduced contemporary photographs and other pictures with an informed and judicious narrative of the assassination, its background and aftermath. One regrets only their claim to have identified Booth and some of the men associated with him in an enlarged (and well-publicized) photograph of the ceremony at Lincoln’s second inauguration, March 4, 1865."

12.77.213.59 11:36, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Roger Norton

Crow's nest

Please verify/quote the recent addition to Crows Nest. BTW, if this is true, what/where is written about this in wikipedia? `'Míkka 23:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Last Photograph of Abraham Lincoln in life

I am writing regarding your photo caption which reads,"One of the last photographs of Lincoln, likely taken between February and April 1865." This is somewhat misleading as that photo was taken by Gardner on Sunday, February 5, 1865. The last photo of Lincoln was taken Monday, March 6, 1865, by a photographer named Henry F. Warren. I have a web page devoted to this subject at http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton1/Lincoln71.html

12.77.224.231 21:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC) Roger Norton, August 3, 2007

Quite right. One of the problems, however, is that so many sources can be found giving the April date for the image, that it's hopeless to try to update it here - too many editors make "drive by edits" without bothering to check the talk page. The result is the unfortunate compromise you've spotted. Rklawton 02:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Strange paragraph

Why is this at all necessary:

Historian Allan Nevins argues that Lincoln made three miscalculations in believing that he could preserve the Union, hold government property, and still avoid war. He "temporarily underrated the gravity of the crisis", overestimated the strength of Unionist sentiment in the South and border states, and misunderstood the conditional support of Unionists in the border states.[27]

It just expresses an opinion and is out of place--Southern Texas 16:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it should be deleted but maybe placed somewhere differently. I'll try to find a place--Southern Texas 16:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

If Nevins is arguing that Lincoln's actions in the crises concerning Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens were rooted in miscalculations, that is very specious, and certainly not unopposed. I would refer to the discussion in "Battle Cry of Freedom" by James M. McPherson, including the footnotes. His "holding and posessing" government property was not just a ploy, but was based on two things: principle and also maneuvering the South into a position where it had to fire the first shots of the war. Maybe initially Lincoln had some miscalculation, but McPherson says that there is good evidence to support that shortly before the time Fort Sumter was fired upon, that Lincoln had soured on the idea of lingering Unionism (at least in the state of Virginia), and had reason to believe the Confederates would fire first without direct provocation. At least Lincoln was able to prevent his being blamed for the start of the war in the North. This is a legitimate viewpoint that I may add in in response to Nevins assertions. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by John ISEM (talk • contribs) 18:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Execution

Do we know the names of those involved with Booth and did they get fair trial and when was their execution?>

External links

The "External links" section is way too long. Wikipedia is not a directory of links and this section needs to be trimmed down. Anyone else want to give it a stab? --ElKevbo 03:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree one hundred percent, but I can't do anything about it. I don't even know which site is important and which isn't. Perhaps we should tag the section somehow? TheBlazikenMaster 10:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Breaking News- Lincoln- Hemifacial microsomia

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2007-08-13-lincoln-facial-asymmetry_N.htm This discovery is certainly worthy of entry into the article. 71.60.175.60 04:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Here's a link to the published synopsys[1] It's better to go with the original publication than with a 2nd party report on it - so long as the original publication comes from a reliable source. If we had an article on his health, it might go there. There are several other health-related topics that might help round out a nice article on the matter. Rklawton 15:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The name

Could someone please record the name "Abraham Lincoln" and add it WC?--Alnokta 08:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Lincoln‎

If anybody is interested they probably should comment here. This is an article about one of Lincoln's first American ancestors that might be on the verge of deletion.--Southern Texas 23:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your heads up -- I've added my two cents. Tom (North Shoreman) 00:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The article was deleted. If anybody feels it should be undeleted please comment here.--Southern Texas 03:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Recommend changing "During his term, he helped preserve the United States by leading the defeat of the secessionist Confederate States of America in the American Civil War." to "During his term, he helped preserve the unity of the United States by leading the defeat of the secessionist Confederate States of America in the American Civil War." as it's more accurate.-no tildes on keyboard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.70.124.194 (talk) 16:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

the duel

The letters were written by Mary Todd according to several sources including; The Boys Life of Abraham Lincoln, by Helen Nicolay; Our Martyr Presidents, by John Coulter 1901; and The Every-day life of Abraham Lincoln, By Francis F. Brown 1886. The Brown book has an eyewitness account by Major J.M. Lucas who was "was an eye-witness of the duel which took place—or, rather, which did not take place—at Alton, across the Mississippi river, in 1842". In the Coulter book, Chip Chapman, a family friend of the Lincoln's, recounts the story as told by Lincoln himself, in which the letters are again verified as written by Mary Todd.

Acccording to all three accounts, the editor of the newspaper, upon being confronted by Shields demanding the name of the author of the articles, was unsure what to do. Unwilling to release the name of the true author, Ms.Todd, but afraid of a confrontation with Shields, he asked Lincolns. Lincoln told him to tell Shields that Lincoln had written the letter, and so took the blame for Ms.Todd's actions.

These events are verified by first hand account of the incident and a first hand account of Lincoln's telling of the story. These details, including the nature of their veracity, should be included in the main article. The event as currently described portrays Lincoln as having began the trouble and writing anonymous slander. The truth of him accepting the blame as a matter of honor portrays a completely different, much more honorable, and more accurate picture of Lincoln.

Please correct immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lincolnfactsfactsfacts (talk • contribs) 19:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Just grammar

"Scholars rank Lincoln among the top three U.S. Presidents, with the highest of those surveyed placing him at number one. " Is this saying that some of the Scholars were high when surveyed and those placed him at number one among US presididents? I think a simple statement that some scholars regard him as "top" president (by what criteria) and many view him as one of the "top" three to date. 213.233.159.69 09:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I assume the writers try to convey that "those" here means "scholar rankings" and the highest result of those put Lincoln at the top. But the sentence is ambiguous, admittedly. And wtf this page protected so long? 58.187.106.176 12:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Because whenever this page is unprotected all kinda unregistered people add all kind of bullshit about him. This kinda bullshit is called vandalism, for more info read this: WP:VANDALISM. TheBlazikenMaster 16:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest a minor edit to that ambiguous sentence: "with the highest *number* of those surveyed placing him at number one." This is my understanding of the intended meaning, based on reading the referenced article about presidential rankings by historians. Forestgarden 22:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree the sentence is poorly worded. Changed to "... majority of those surveyed..." How does that look? Unimaginative Username 04:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

After reviewing Historical rankings of United States Presidents, I modified the above to "... greatest number..." A "majority" would mean that more than half of the scholars surveyed ranked him as #1, and that is not at all certain. He scored #1 in half (6/12) of the surveys listed, but note: "although some politicians and celebrities also took part." ... There is no breakdown of the votes cast by each "scholar" in each survey, so "majority" or "more than half" is not known, but it is very evident that Lincoln received a greater number of votes than any other President. Unimaginative Username 05:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC), (member, WP:LoCE).

Vice Presidency

I wanted to change a part of the entry on Abraham Lincoln. Under the election of 1864, it says that Lincoln picked Andrew Johnson as his running mate in an attempt to garner widespread electoral support. My problem is: Lincoln purposefully did not indicate a preference for vice president before the Republican nominating convention. Though many asked him whether he preferred Hamlin, Johnson, or others, he refused to answer. Therefore, the entry should read: the Republican Party "selected Andrew Johnson, a War Democrat from the Southern state of Tennessee, as his running mate in order to form a broader coalition."

Thoughts?

Hstrybff 04:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)