Talk:History of Minnesota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star History of Minnesota is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 11, 2008.
WikiProject Minnesota This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of Top-importance within Minnesota articles.

The following comments about the quality and importance of this article have been left: (edit – history – watch – refresh)


Contents

[edit] Geological history

Overkill. Why not start with the Big Bang? As far as I can tell, it's the convention with this type of article to go back only to the earliest human habitation (see History of California, History of Texas and Utah#History). Maybe the geological history - cleaned up, as a deal of it's a bit amateur ("thunder lizards" have a proper name, y'know) - could be put under a separate article called Minnesota regional geology or similar? Tearlach 02:51, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Geological history and early life

2.7 billion years ago, the first pieces of land that would later form the U.S. state of Minnesota began to rise up out of an ancient ocean as a chain of volcanic islands. Much of the underlying gneiss rock of today's state had already been formed nearly a billion years earlier, but still laid underneath the sea. Except for the region where the islands appeared in what is now the northern part of the state, most of the region remained underwater. About two billion years ago, much of the water had drained away. Heavy mineral deposits containing iron collected on the shores of a receding sea to form the Mesabi, Cuyuna, Vermilion, and Gunflint iron ranges from the center of the state up into what is now Canada.

1.1 billion years ago, a rift valley began to pull the state apart. Lava emerged from cracks along the edges. The rift extended from the current Lake Superior area through the state and down into what is now Kansas. However, the separation stopped before the land could become two separate continents. About 100 million years later, the last volcano in the area went quiet.

550 million years ago, the area found itself repeatedly inundated with water of a shallow sea that grew and receded through several cycles. At this point, the land mass of what is now North America ran along the equator. At that time, Minnesota had a tropical climate. Small marine creatures such as trilobites, coral, and snails float through the sea. The shells of the tiny animals sink to the bottom of the sea, eventually forming limestone and sandstone. When dinosaurs roamed the planet, Minnesota didn't have a remarkable population of thunder lizards. The region remained coastline for a long period, with creatures resembling crocodiles and sharks sliding through the nearby seas.

Other land animals followed as the dinosaurs disappeared, but much of the historical record of this time was etched away as glaciers expanded and retreated across the region through several cycles starting about 2 million years ago. Ice ages come and go as humans develop in other parts of the world. The ice continued to retreat for the last time about 12,500 years before the present time. Melting glaciers filled the lakes and rivers of the state. Minnesota was on the southern edge of Lake Agassiz at this time, a massive lake with a volume rivaling that of the Great Lakes combined together. The River Warren was the southern outlet of the lake, and had an immense flow through the valleys now used by the Minnesota River and Mississippi River. Falls on the river were precursors to the Saint Anthony Falls.

At this time, a number of giant animals roamed the area. Beavers were the size of bears, and mammoths were 14 feet (4.3m) high at the shoulder and weighed 10 tons. Even buffalo were much larger than they are today. Glaciers continued to retreat and the climate became warmer in the next few millennia. The giant creatures eventually died out about 9,000 years ago.

[edit] Topics that should be covered

The Minnesota Historical Society list of history topics would be a good place to start expanding this article. (And it needs expanding -- the article doesn't even cover major historical figures like Hubert Humphrey or Walter Mondale.) If nothing else, the topic areas on the page could cover some of the topic division of this article. --Elkman 19:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NWA

Good idea, Elkman to write about historical significance of NWA.

[edit] Auto Peer Review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[1]
  • Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
  • See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[2]
  • There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[3] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.[4]
  • There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. For example,
    • apparently
    • is considered
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[5]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 17 additive terms, a bit too much.
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
    • Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space inbetween. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. [6]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Ravedave (help name my baby) 01:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA passed

1. Well written? Pass
2. Factually accurate? Pass
3. Broad in coverage? Pass
4. Neutral point of view? Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images? Pass

It thus passes all the GA criteria with success and is thoroughly well written. It is broad enough and as expected it is neutral. Some pictures really help the reader in situating the context and in picturing the areas. Lincher 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some Revert Needed

Tutmosis has begun copyediting the article. IMO, some of what he has done improves the clarity and mission of the article, however, in some cases he has changed meanings or facts, most likely inadvertently, such as changing 1600s and 1700s to 16th century and 17th century. In order to avoid massive simultaneous editing, I'll wait a few days to see if he is done before correcting mistakes he has introduced. If it gets too screwed up, we can revert to Jonathunder's 11 October version. Appraiser 02:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Politics

I don't think "Contemporary Politics" describes the content. e.g. The first paragraph starts with the 1948 convention. Perhaps the section should try to do an overview of politics from 1840 to present, in keeping with the history of the state. I'd also like to see the

See also: Politics of Minnesota put back in to direct the reader there for more detail. Appraiser 14:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • My idea there was to keep the "Modern Minnesota" section together as a post-World War II collection of topics. The Great Depression section covers some of the prewar politics, such as the Farmer-Labor party's attempts to bring the state out of the depression in the 1930s. The postwar politics section definitely needs some expansion, and I'm hoping to get to it soon. (Of course, anyone is welcome to help.) In particular, I want to cover how Hubert Humphrey became mayor of Minneapolis and pushed for civil rights reform years before it became a national issue (with his help), how he united the Farmer-Labor Party with the Democratic Party, his election and career in the Senate, and his election as Vice President. Then, I want to cover Senator Walter Mondale, Wendell Anderson, Rudy Perpich, possibly Al Quie, and possibly some others. Paul Wellstone isn't even mentioned, and I think he should be. Let me know what you think about the organization I'm looking into. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 16:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • That makes sense to me now. How about ===Post-war politics=== as a header? --Appraiser 17:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hotbed of medical care and research

Under this section, I think it would be more complete if someone could add a blurb about the University of Minnesota. They have a number of world medical "firsts", especially in the transplant field. A couple of big events could probably be picked out of this list and referenced to the following link: U of M page ....... Another possible ref Gopher backer 21:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's left?

What's left before nominating for FA? -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 22:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to mention a little bit about Paul Wellstone in the "Postwar Politics" section, at least from a historical perspective as one of Minnesota's influential state senators. Also, if anyone wants to review the intro section to make sure it's concise, that would help. After that, I think it's ready for the FA nomination. I'm on vacation right now (in warm, sunny Miami), and I didn't want to nominate the article before I got back. I'll be back early next week. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 16:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The first reference is a dead link. Even though it was gathered on 1/12/07, I think the Star Tribune pulls a lot of their general news articles off the web about three weeks after they're published. Gopher backer 16:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the reference is a dead link, and they pull their articles after about three weeks or so. I'll pull the URL from that reference, but since they published the article in the paper on that date, I think it's still valid to cite the article in the first place. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 22:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction

Comments on the Featured Article candidacy indicate the introduction may be too long. Here is my suggested revision (text only):

The history of Minnesota is the human history of the U.S. state of Minnesota from the earliest human settlement to the present day. It tells the story of a land shaped by the influences of both its original Native American settlers and more recent European immigrants. In the past several centuries the state’s economy has transitioned from one based on extractive industries such as fur trading, logging, agriculture, and mining all made possible by abundant natural resources, to today’s diverse economy with particular emphases on banking, computers, and health care, while logging, farming, and mining remain prominent.
The first people came to the region during the last Ice Age, following herds of game. The Anishinaabe, the Sioux, and the other Native American inhabitants of the region represent the descendants of these first early settlers. European presence began with the arrival of French fur traders in the 1600s. During the 1800s most of the Native American population was driven out as American settlers moved westward. Fort Snelling was built between 1819 and 1825 as a frontier outpost to protect the United States' territorial interests. The fort guarded Saint Anthony Falls which attracted early settlers seeking power for sawmills; it also protected the downriver settlement which became Saint Paul. Minnesota Territory was organized in 1849, and on May 11, 1858, Minnesota became the 32nd US state.
Shortly after statehood came the American Civil War and the Sioux Uprising. Following these disruptions the state entered into an era of intense growth, with immigrants attracted by opportunities in logging and agriculture. The construction of railroads in the late 19th century helped to attract immigrants, establish the farm economy, and bring goods to market. Minneapolis grew up next to Saint Anthony Falls and the water power from the falls, coupled with innovations in milling methods, enabled the city to become the “milling capital of the world”.
The discovery of huge deposits of high-grade iron ore in northern Minnesota at the end of the 19th century led to the development of an industry which included open-pit mining of th ore and its and shipment to Great Lakes steel mills via ports at Duluth and Two Harbors. The development of the flour milling and mining industries along with other changes in the economy resulted in population shifts from rural areas into central cities. Economic development and social changes led to a more prominent role for the state government.
The Great Depression was felt with layoffs in the iron mining industry and with trouble in labor relations, but New Deal programs brought relief to the state. After World War II, Minnesota companies such Sperry Rand, Honeywell and Control Data started the high-tech sector. The Twin Cities also became a regional center for arts and culture with several cultural institutions such as the Guthrie Theater, Minnesota Orchestra, and the Walker Art Center.

I think it squeezes a couple of lines out of the present text. If the authors of this article feel it it useful, please use it. Kablammo 20:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Kablammo, good idea. I took yours and went farther. For an article this size people might expect or be used to something like four paragraphs. -Susanlesch 22:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The history of Minnesota is the story of a state shaped by its original Native American residents, European exploration and settlement, and the emergence of industries made possible by the state's natural resources. Minnesota achieved prominence through fur trading, logging, and farming, and later, railroads, flour milling and iron mining. Today, the state is a center for banking, computers and health care, while logging, farming and mining are still important.

The first settlers followed herds of large game to the region during the last Ice Age, and from them descended the Anishinaabe, the Sioux, and the other Native American inhabitants. Fur traders from France arrived during the 1600s and by the 1800s as they moved west, Europeans drove out most of the Native Americans. Built to protect United States territorial interests, Fort Snelling brought early settlers to Saint Anthony Falls, who used the waterfall for powering sawmills, and to the downriver settlement that became Saint Paul.

Minnesota became a part of the United States as the Minnesota Territory in 1849, and became the 32nd US state on May 11, 1858. Following the American Civil War and the Sioux Uprising, the state's natural resources were tapped for logging and farming. Railroads attracted immigrants, established the farm economy and brought goods to market. Minneapolis grew from the waterfall's power, and by innovating milling methods, became the "milling capital of the world."

New industry came from iron ore, discovered in the north, mined relatively easily from open pits, and shipped to Great Lakes steel mills from the ports at Duluth and Two Harbors. Economic development and social changes led to a more prominent state government and a population shift from rural areas to cities. The Great Depression brought layoffs in mining and trouble in labor relations but New Deal programs helped the state. After World War II, Minnesota became known for technology, fueled by early computer companies Sperry Rand, Control Data and Cray. The Twin Cities also became a regional center for the arts with cultural institutions such as the Guthrie Theater, Minnesota Orchestra, and the Walker Art Center.

I like it. I may suggest some minor tweaks, but I'll let others weigh in first. Kablammo 22:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Susanlesch. I used the introduction you provided, but with a few minor tweaks. The shorter format looks better -- I have to admit that the introduction was too long. Anyone else is welcome to revise it. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 01:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bots on the loose

User:Betacommand is trying to delete anything that links to www.famousamericans.net, including valid sourcing in articles such as this. It's an attempt to purge WP of "spam" to for-profit sites. In this article, the reference in question was added at least a year ago, prior to the article achieving FA status. There is a discussion here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard about it. Personally, I'd rather see a statement sourced by a for-profit site then unsourced (the same argument could be made for newspapers, magazines, and other news sources. --Appraiser (talk) 14:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

A I am not a bot, second there is a major reliability issue here. along with the massive spamming that has been done by that domain. βcommand 14:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
We should all strive to successively improve the quality of the sources we cite. Perhaps we eventually will get to the point where all of our sources are to peer-reviewed or fully sourced authorities. But until we get to that point, reference to some source is better than none, and neither articles nor their editors should suffer because of unrelated spamming from or regarding the domain from which the source is taken. Let's limit the remedy to the harm; stop the spamming, eliminate the addition of the domain from External links sections, but allow the retention of sources used in in-line referencing. Kablammo (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
that fails to address the fact that the site is not reliable and thus should not be linked to. βcommand 15:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
It is not clear to me why it is not reliable-- I don't have time to research that now. I doubt no one's good faith here. Perhaps a solution is to retain the source but have the Minn Wikiproject members undertake to replace it. Kablammo (talk) 15:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I have reinstated the reference. Is this an acceptable substitute? Kablammo (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • From what I can tell, the only fact being cited by the reference is that Picard dn Gay was there too. Therefore I think it is a good substitute. Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  1. Thank you Kablammo.
  2. Betacommand, I believe you are now in violation of the 3R rule.
  3. The "fact" that is cited in this case is that Father Louis Hennepin was accompanied by Michel Aco and Antoine Auguelle (aka Picard Du Gay). Are you claiming that that is not true? Based on what alternate source? If it is not true, why don't you fix the article and provide your source? To simply delete the reference because you believe it to be unreliable without changing the text makes no sense at all to me.
  4. As an FA, this article has been well-scrutinized. It offends me that in the article's 3+year history, the only "contribution" you have provided is to delete the source used on a statement about a relatively uncontroversial event that happened three hundred years ago at a place you have probably never been to. I ask you again to please cease and desist. Thank you.--Appraiser (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
whether or or not its FA makes no difference, what its referencing does not matter, the fact is what you are citing has know to lie about information is NOT a reliable source and should not be used. Please find a better source. βcommand 15:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of famousamericans.net link

Per Durova's message at WP:AN#In plain English, I have again removed the famousamericans.net link. Take a look at that whole thread for details. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The site has now been blacklisted. This method of procedure is hardly respectful of the collaborative process, nor of the work of many editors. For a handful of editors to remove in-line references added by many editors to many articles (even user sandboxes), without adequate explanation or discussion with those affected, is unwise. This matter was under active discussion above and yet this precipitate action was taken to forestall it. Kablammo (talk) 17:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Please also see the diff here. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, and the discussion rages on there, and elsewhere, with differing points of view. Is not collaboration and discussion an important value here? When parties are working toward a solution do you not know how destructive it can be to present them a fait accompli? Kablammo (talk) 17:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
the site has major RS issues, they said George Washington was the 4th president of the USA, get over it, and find better sources. βcommand 17:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
That would be a problem, unless it is referring to officers under the Articles of Confederation. Kablammo (talk) 17:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Is there a claim that the use of the source here was unreliable? Kablammo (talk) 17:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
the whole domain has problems. Please also note my wording, I said the fourth president. there is one entry were the guy is his own father. there is no need to disprove every page if you know the people running the site are full of bullshit. βcommand 17:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
β, that may well be. And if so, then we should find a better reference-- something we were working on, as you see above. But the removal of the link from a FA, accompanied only by a cryptic explanation linking to the wrong page, followed by a blacklisting of the site (by another editor) while discussion was ongoing at the page where that discussion is located and at several talk pages, was unproductive. In these articles we believe in collaboration and discussion; we have always managed to work things out without involving any sort of process other than direct discussion. I do not question your motives; I only suggest your methods could have been better. We all have a common interest-- to improve the quality of our work, including references, and discussion with and suggestions from you or anyone are welcome. Kablammo (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Given the quantity of articles that had references pointing to famousamericans.net, it would have been completely impossible to notify major contributors to all of the articles that linked to it. I'm sorry that the process seems poor, but it's a spam site with garbage information in it, so to me it's better to protect against it even if it results in a discussion like this one, rather than having it plastered all over Wikipedia. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
This reasoning sounds an awful lot like the reasoning I hear from teachers who never allow their students to look at Wikipedia (because it has errors). I checked George Washington's entry on famousamericans.net (now blacklisted) and see no glaring errors. The example cited may have been a short-lived revision just like we see here every day. I agree that the site should not be allowed to stay in External links sections, and that if it is cited as a reference, the facts need to be scrutinized. But in this particular case, I don't believe the facts are in error and I don't believe it was added by a spammer or in an inappropriate place. Fortunately Kablammo found an alternative reference for us to use here, but I believe wholesale deletion of references without bothering to check for accuracy or appropriateness is counterproductive to Wikipedia, and that is the reason I first thought the action was that of a bot (blind deletion without human scrutiny).--Appraiser (talk) 18:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I encourage everyone to read the more general discussion at WP:AN#Virtualology and Stanley L. Klos -- boon to our historical articles or just a bain of spam?, then join in the sub-discussion of what's been done at WP:AN#Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography 1887-89. --A. B. (talk) 23:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recording

Started recording for May 11 front FA. Enjoy my bastardized French! .:DavuMaya:. 06:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First sentence

Any way that first sentence can be changed? It makes it sound like the blurb on the back of a book or for a film. Not encyclopedic at all. Al Tally (talk) 11:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the most blurb like bit (in my opinion). Guest9999 (talk) 17:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation of Great Depression

From the Great Depression section of the article:

'One of the causes of the Depression was that United States businesses in the 1920s had improved their efficiency through standardizing production methods and eliminating waste. Business owners were reaping the benefits of this increase in productivity, but they were not sharing it with their employees because of the weakness of organized labor, nor were they sharing it with the public in the form of lowered prices. Instead, the windfall went to stockholders. The eventual result was that consumers could no longer afford the goods that factories were producing.'

I've never heard this explanation before. It doesn't seem sensible to begin with (wouldn't competing businesses try to lower prices to increase sales?), and there is extensive documentation of far more significant causes in the Great Depression article. I know this claim is referenced, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced out. 74.65.13.18 (talk) 11:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

A bigger question would be why this explanation is in the article at all. Nothing specific in the history of Minnesota is part of this cause so why is it here? I think we should delete the statement. What's relevant here is how the Great Depression affected the history of Minnesota, not what caused it. DavidRF (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I got that particular statement from Norman Risjord in his book A Popular History of Minnesota. I think he was making the argument that this particular cause of the Depression was especially applicable to Minnesota. He also writes: "Minnesota, with its 'open shop' mills and mines, commitment to industrial peace, and long-suffering farmers, helped bring about the crash and shared in the general economic decline." He later makes the point that Minnesota's experience during the Depression helped shape the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party and its platforms during the 1930s. I'll think about whether there's a way to reword that section, or if there's a way to make the Minnesota portion more relevant. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 01:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)