Talk:James Sanks Brisbin

Pennsylvania Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group.

Military history: Biography / North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

A fact from James Sanks Brisbin appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 November 2008 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in addition to being a general in the Union Army, James Sanks Brisbin was also a prolific writer, and authored several works on a variety of subjects?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/November.

Wikipedia

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on James Sanks Brisbin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708161515/http://www.civilwarreference.com/people/index.php?peopleID=337 to http://www.civilwarreference.com/people/index.php?peopleID=337

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

@Aquabluetesla: Please stop edit-warring to restore unreliably sourced content. If you want that content to be kept, the burden is on you to provide reliable sources for it, and not restore it until you have done so. And style changes that you don't happen to like are not justification for restoring unreliable sourcing, but in this case they are also appropriate per MOS. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to this supposed MOS that makes it "also appropriate per MOS". The insignias are reflected on other Civil War generals, including the ones that are linked in the article. Aquabluetesla (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:OLINK and MOS:DECOR. And again, disagreement with that is not justification for poor sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm failing to understand how these apply. This is not against MOS:OL in any way. I don’t understand how it applies to any specific rule on MOS:DECOR either. They are important to include, as the amount of stars that are indicated serve an informative purpose. Aquabluetesla (talk) 18:37, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You restored a link to an article on a major country (OLINK) and icons that do not improve comprehension beyond what is already provided by the text (DECOR). The bigger thing that you're failing to understand though is that even if you were 100% correct on the questions of style, edit-warring to retain poorly sourced content is still not something you should be doing. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:45, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That source that does not meet RS is not the only one that indicates he was a lawyer before the Civil War. See note 3. The insignias are informative as they indicate the amounts of stars he obtained for the rank of general for those who are unfamiliar with military terms. Aquabluetesla (talk) 18:48, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ref currently numbered as 3 does not indicate he was a practicing lawyer when the war began, which is one of the claims you reinstated. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC) It also doesn't say what you've now changed that claim to (without changing the citation). Nikkimaria (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC) It also doesn't say what you've now changed that claim to. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:26, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aquabluetesla: STATUSQUO is an essay; WP:BURDEN is policy. If you want to restore material, it's up to you to include reliable sourcing for it. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, you can't restore it. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not all about that. Please stop removing the insignias. Aquabluetesla (talk) 02:37, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is the important issue, and the one that you must address by policy. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's bogus. It's already been addressed. It seems you're continuing to edit war just because. Aquabluetesla (talk) 02:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to take a look at the article, which still includes a claim cited to that source. Tagging it is insufficient to meet your burden. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]