Adding sources.


  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):
  • Why it should be changed:
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Tfbaldwin069 (talk) 20:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Sidney Morrison published "Frederick Douglass: A Novel" (2024) ISBN 978-09988257-9-3, Hawthorne Books & Literary Arts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfbaldwin069 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: To include work in an 'in popular culture' section, we generally request the inclusion of a reliable and independent source. It would help if the work or the author or both were notable enough for their own articles (per WP:WTAF). See Wikipedia:Notability (books) and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals for info on that. Grayfell (talk) 20:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Anthony notability

User:OAnick added brackets to the first mention of Aaron Anthony, which suggests there should be an article about him. I would argue against that, as Anthony's only notability is that he owned Douglass, and was possibly his father, means there should not be a separate article on him. Thoughts? Paulmlieberman (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Paulmlieberman:. I am inclined to agree. Full disclosure that I'm running an editathon about the history of abolition for colleagues with no experience of editing Wikipedia and was looking for a screenshot of a relevant article to illustrate citations and wiki links, including a red link. There is some biographical info about Aaron Anthony so redlinked him, though did consider that he may not be notable for the reasons you have outlined.
Another consideration of course was an active talk page so thanks for posting here rather than simply reverting the edit!
On another note, I was wondering how close this article may be to GA status? The process of nominating an article for GA and the community process for review isn't something I've done before. While I'm not a subject expert, I will be working with colleagues who are. Nick Sheppard (talk) 07:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. I will revert the edit once it has served your purpose (or you can). Let me know when.
As to GA status: I have long wanted to nominate this article for GA, given Douglass' importance. I personally do not have the time to make this happen. I would be glad to support any effort on that front. The fact is, the article is long and a bit disjointed. There are very different approaches, and degrees of "encyclopedia-ness" in various sections of the article, which I feel would need to be addressed to make this a "good article". Paulmlieberman (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Douglass was not a philosopher

The editor who added that he was a philosopher cited a source that says merely, "Douglass can be linked to the history of American philosophy, through his participation in national discussions about the nature of and future of the American Republic and its institutions." First, if he can be linked to the history of American philosophy (whatever that means), that does not make him a philosopher, and he wasn't one. Second, "discussions about the nature of and future of the American Republic and its institutions" are not philosophy. Philosophy is "a systematic study of general and fundamental questions concerning topics like existence, reason, knowledge, value, mind, and language." That does not describe what Douglass studied. Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbs up. Thanks for the feedback. Zorblin (talk) 20:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say that I think we should say slave and not slavery in this passage because I am teaching a 3rd grade class and they are asking me what does enslaved person mean and I want to teach them that is is a slave and not enslaved person. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddiebigelow (talk • contribs) 14:26, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2025

We do not know the exact date of Fredrick douglasses birth so we should put it to 1817-1818 2603:300A:D2F:B200:EF2D:C50E:168D:7120 (talk) 17:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: please read footnote. M.Bitton (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No tags for this post.