Talk:Elihu Root

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents

[edit] photo

I know the photo looks better on the left, but it messed up the bulletting there, so I moved it to the right hand side. If we get more info here, we can move it back to the left. RickK 00:30, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

[edit] nephew

I met a great great nephew of Elihu Root working here at the Library of Congress. The young Root works in the House of Representatives.

[edit] bio info from Elihu Root House

There's some potentially useful bio info in the NRHP documentation now linked at the Elihu Root House article, if anyone cares to incorporate any of that into the Elihu Root article. I am working on the House article, and not the Elihu Root article, myself.doncram 23:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Root's position on Federal Reserve

I put the quote back in the article because the sourc eis reliable. The editor who removed it did not give a reason why he believes it is unreliable. Mpublius 13:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Mpublius, this has become absurd. I most certainly did explain why I believe the source to be unreliable: in my edit summary ([1], I stated:

deleted quote supported by unreliable source (http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pz-art-mcfadden.html) - web site makes incoherent arguments about central banking

You then reverted my deletion without explanation ([2]). I then reverted your reversion ([3]) with the comment "re-delete quote - the source is unreliable, & Wikipedia is not a quote farm". The latter part of comment, in case you are (as usual) ignoring the point, means that random collections of quotations attributed to a person are not appropriate for Wikipedia; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a quotation reference.
You then reverted me again, misrepresenting the situation once again, by saying that you had "removed unexplained revert" ([4])—do you think you are the only person who can access the article histories?
Finally, when Famspear reverted your second reversion, pointing out it in his edit summary that my deletion had been explained, you reverted one more time, suddenly inventing a new rule (as you are wont to do) that all explanations of reversions must be on the talk page ([5]). (Despite the fact, that up until that point, all your explanations of reversions had been made in edit summaries.)
To be absolutely clear, your supposed reliable source—"PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™—is patently unreliable:
It is a Self-published source that is most certainly not "produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". The fact that the author is trolling for "donations" ought to be a clue.
It is an Extremist source, making the extreme minority claim that all interest is "usury", and therefore, evil.
You are using this (highly questionable) source to support the Exceptional claim that Elihu Root, a respected Senator, made extreme claims about a future economic catastrophe caused by the Federal Reserve.
Finally, the web site contains demonstrably false information. On its "Historic Quotes" page, at least two of quotes are known frauds: Jefferson's supposed quote about the evils of "inflation and deflation" (which would have had to have been made long before the term "deflation" was invented); and Woodrow Wilson's supposed quote about having "ruined the country" by supporting the Federal Reserve Act, which quote the article on America: From Freedom to Fascism already explains is a fraud.
Finally, it is obvious you copied in the introductory sentence to the quote (beginning "A few days before...") in direct violation of Wikipedia's Copyright policy.
Do you really think no one will notice what you are doing? — Mateo SA (talk | contribs) 05:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed the quotes section. This article is also very bad because it is a narrative of original research, and contains very few links to external sources. Mpublius 20:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)