Talk:Augustus Owsley Stanley

A few new bits

I received this response to a few edits I made today:

Just had a few questions regarding your recent edits to Augustus O. Stanley. First, regarding "who went by his middle name", I would note that in my perusal of sources while taking this article to GA and then FA, I saw "Augustus O.", "A. O.", "A. Owsley", and infrequently, just "Owsley". While the fact that his NYT editorial was signed "A. Owsley" may indicate his preference, I don't know that it would necessarily be conclusive. Even if it is, I think the more conventional way to indicate this might be to put his middle name in quotation marks, rather than spelling out "who went by his middle name", which seems awkward to me.

Second, you added "The effort included a hearing with no witnesses but broad-brush publicity in New York City Hall in July, 1911." I claim little familiarity with the hearings as a whole; was this meeting particularly significant to Stanley's life or the hearings as a whole? Why is it mentioned? Also, "no witnesses but broad-brush publicity" seems a little POVish. The NYT article seems to indicate that witnesses were called later, though it's unclear whether those were in NYC or Washington, D.C. I'm rather inclined to remove this addition.

Also, you added "for example, relative to the constitutional implications of search and seizure provisions in legislation in early 1922". While this is directly related to Stanley, its introduction into the article seems a little forced without some context. Would you be OK with moving the source to the Further reading section? That way, readers who were interested could get a little taste of Stanley in his own words. Alternatively, it would be good if we could maybe create a short paragraph about Stanley's overall actions regarding prohibition in the Senate to give his opposition to this one aspect some context.

Feel free to respond here, on my talk page, or perhaps most appropriately, copy this discussion to the article's talk page where other interested editors can comment as well. Thanks for your efforts to improve the article. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 17:23, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I feel quotation marks could be awkward, partic. if he didn't always go by his middle name. How about "sometimes" in the phrase I inserted at the opening of the article. (My edits remain in place, for the time being, to anyone else who may be reading this exchange.) Something about the variety seems worthwhile up front, and I do think the Times citation is pretty strong. Another idea (I've wondered about this before): Is it worth changing/easy enough to change/better to change the whole name of the article, go with the full name? With a referral-link for the current abbreviated name. Maybe best.

I think moving from "Augustus O. Stanley" to "Augustus Owsley Stanley" makes all kinds of sense, regardless of whether we ever sort out the naming issue. It'll take an admin to effect the move, though, since "Augustus Owsley Stanley" is already a redirect. I think I know someone who would be willing to do it. I like the change to "sometimes", but I might further suggest relegating this information to a footnote, as it doesn't really seem important enough for the lead and doesn't fit neatly anywhere in the body, imo.

I was sort of quick in my characterization of the steel hearing for which I found coverage. I employed the colloquial phrase "broad brush" (and tried unsuccessfully to find a definition of it to link to) to take in the mentions of Roosevelt in the sub-head and others in the body of the story (in light of what I learned further in the paragraph, here). But I agree, also, the article is but a fragment, as is the other article I came upon, on prohibition.

I'm comfortable if both the articles (I'd like to see the steel article, too) were moved to Further reading and my characterization removed. I'm sorry, though; I'm not the one to do an "overall actions" paragraph re: Prohibition. Not today, at least. And thanks for (so far) not challenging the Grateful Dead addition; it is perhaps a little broader reference than the one to (another) prohibited substance; and significant in its own right.

Moving both articles to the Further reading section works for me. Retaining the one about the steel hearings might inspire someone to write the paragraph we've discussed. (I have long-since left off improving this article in favor of some others that still need work, so I'm probably not the best one to do it right now either.)

re: The Grateful Dead, I think it's a fairly well-established connection. Though the page cited as a source may not explicitly make it, I doubt anyone would challenge information that is rather tangential to the subject of the article, especially considering that it is sourced to a biography of Jerry Garcia!

Would you like me to make changes discussed, in the article here? I'm fine I think with your judgment if you want to proceed, but I'll check back. Thanks again. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to make the ones you can; I'll contact an admin friend about the move. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Article moved. Willking1979 (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Changes made, here and at Grateful Dead. Don't exactly understand the Garcia bio ref. but I like the AOS re-titling, and am content. Good day's work all around. Swliv (talk) 01:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2018

Currently says: "Augustus Owsley Stanley III (1935–2011), became a well-known LSD chemist and backer of the Grateful Dead during the hippie movement"

His grandson wasn't a "backer" - whatever that means - he was the Dead's Audio Engineer who helped design the band's iconic symbol Skull logo. 86.137.42.11 (talk) 11:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, histories of the Grateful Dead state that he helped bankroll the band at its beginning. At a minimum, he lavished them with amplifiers and other electronic equipment, and I think he provided other funding too. And yes: he was also their audio engineer. Jbening (talk) 13:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: per Owsley Stanley#Involvement with the Grateful_Dead he "financed them and worked with them as their first soundman", so he was their backer. NiciVampireHeart 14:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Er no. What you're basically saying is that as it's only marginally correct, a half truth, so there is no need for any more clarification? Stanley's entire career/involvement with the band was just the first six months or so, and it's just too far out (as the Dead might say) to mention his more notable achievement of being their sound engineer. Glad to see WP:GF still comes with that good old Wiki finger to IPs trying to improve articles (as opposed to fighting for control of them). 86.137.42.11 (talk) 16:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)