User talk:Mitchumch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Mitchumch, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  BD2412 T 13:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Giles v. Harris

Per your inquiry, see Muskrat v. United States for a sample of how these categories fill out. Prior history/subsequent history deal with the cases from which this was being appealed, and if it was sent down for a lower court to decide (often there is no subsequent history). The holding is just a summary of the rule decided by the case. There also may be no concurrence in the judgement (those are not so common). Laws applied can be tricky with constitutional cases - in this case it's technically the Eleventh Amendment. BD2412 T 05:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Quotations

Please do not italicize normal English-language quotations. It goes against our Manual of Style. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The King Center

I've seen you making some good edits in history articles, you are doing great job covering a wide swath of history. Last week, I happened to notice that there was no article on the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change, even though it is mentioned in several articles listed in Category:Martin Luther King, Jr.. Since the center has been involved in controversies (over the Atlanta historic site, the King memorial in Washington, and the licensing of King's works) this could be a controversial article, but I decided I would start it and make sure it remains WP:NPOV. Unfortunately I just never find the time to dig into the topic. I invite you to start it if you have any interest. Don't do it if you aren't interested - I know this is quite presumptuous on my part ;-). In any case, keep up the good work and contact me if you ever need anything. NoSeptember talk 17:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admins are watching you

I got a kick out of the idea that admins watching you and checking your edits seems strange :-). In case you don't know, admins are as plentiful as mice here (almost 1000 of them) and for the most part quite harmless. The two guys who posted above me on this page are also admins. Admins are around to enforce policy (vandalism etc.) but have no special rights when it comes to the actual content of the encyclopedia, we are all equal and are expected to work to a consensus. We are also very public with our communications to each other and read each others talk pages and watch each others edits and so forth all the time. There is no such thing as a secret on wikipedia. One good way to find out about interesting articles is to scan the contributions of editors you see making good edits - try it. See you around ;-) NoSeptember talk 13:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Source Please?

I would like to merge the information you placed in American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968) into Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement, but I can't do that without knowing that we aren't plagiarizing. Could you post your source in the Discussion of the first topic? Simesa 17:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

You wrote:
After I check each bulleted date for correct wikilinks and to ensure each article so linked has references and citations, is it okay to transfer that bulleted date to the Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement article or do you want to check that date before hand?
You really don't need my approval, and it is very unlikely that I'd delete anything. My concern was to have the source of not-easily-checkable items footnoted - for example, "(1935) In March, riots in Harlem begin after a young black man is badly beaten in a department store for shoplifting" should have a footnote to a source. On the other hand, "(1940) On June 10th, Marcus Garvey dies in London." wouldn't need a source - there's already an article on him (this fact might actually belong in that article and not here, unless he had a notable funereal). "On October 10, the U.S. Supreme Court requires University of Alabama to admit Autherine Lucy." doesn't have to have a footnote IF the date is placed in the article on her or is commonly available (as it is - I checked), but "In July, a pupil placement law is enacted in Alabama." probably should have one. What can't be readily checked should be footnoted (many lines can refer to the same footnote of course). Thanks for all your hard work! Simesa 19:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Your line under 1954 "Bobby Bland becomes the first black man to graduate from theUniversity of Virginia engineering school." seems to be bogus -- what's going on? Simesa 03:35, 17 February 2006 (UTC)