Talk:Frederick Douglass/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

birthdate issue

Due to repeated attempts to (a) set his birthday, which is unknown, and (b) set his birthyear, which was probably 1817 or 1818, I've added an explicit statement as to these uncertainties, and referenced them. Bloody Viking (talk) 15:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

sainthood?

Why is Douglass classified under Anglican saints? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.104.119 (talk) 05:31, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. HairyWombat 18:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Error - From slavery to freedom section

The article incorrectly states that Frederick Douglass unsuccessfully tried to escape from his owner Mr. Covey. In truth, Mr. Covey was a "slave breaker" and Frederick Douglass was only rented by Mr. Covey from his owner Thomas Auld in order to have him "broken". He did run away from Mr. Covey but only to go see his owner Thomas Auld to ask for protection. A day later he returned to Mr. Covey. This information can be found in Chapter 10 of Douglass's autobiography The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass.

Ras: You're right, I wondered about that one too, I read the whole narrative only a week ago (very, very, very recommendable!), and so you should go forward and delete the bit about escape from Covey.

What amazes me most about this man, apart from all his obvious brilliance, is that history has shown that he came down exactly right on every single issue. Not just on racial equality but also regarding women's rights, yes, even in his little dispute with Mr. Lloyd Garrison over the nature of the US Constitution, he was proved very, very right. Definitely a sage!!! A kind of 19th Century Mandela!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasmus Sonderriis (talk • contribs) 00:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference in Douglass's writing to codes in songs

On the Wikipedia page relating to Underground Railroad Songs carrying coded messages, the page dismisses this as an urban myth from the 20th century. Infact I have found web sites that quote the writings of Frederick Douglass as containing one of the earliest references to coding.Given he died in 1895 this makes the comment on the site suspect in terms of accuracy.

I have just found on Google Books that parts of "My Bondage and my Freedom" by F Douglass (1855) are online, and the content page mentions a Section “Hymns with double meaning” p203. Infact the relevant piece is bottom of page 203 to top of p204.

I am not sure if this is the specific autobiographical writings the other websites refer to or whether he mentions more fully the subject of coding in songs in his later works. Given that aboliton occurred in 1865 it would appear logical he would not have said directly in his work published in 1855 that the songs carried specfic codes relating to escape directions.

I noticed the Wiki Underground Railroad songs site: - Does not mention Frederick Douglass - implies the song "Follow the Drinking Gourd" containing coding is suspect and dates from the publication of a book in the 1930's. At no point does it mention songs being passed orally (given it was prohibited to teach enslaved people to read) or that the first time a song /lyrics appear in print may be decades after its original composition or that the words we sing today may not be the original lyrics - none of the cited works in the references date from before 1999, so the authour of the site has not checked bakc to original sources before dismissing the subject as an urban myth - I have added a quote to the discussion from a speech by Martin Luther King (1968) where he makes reference to the coding in songs.

Ghostwhisperer II (talk) 12:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Twelve-portrait composite

I do not wish to see the 12-portrait composite image (File:Frederick Douglass composite.png) anywhere in the article. I do not think it appropriate, as it gives 1/12th the visual detail of any one of the images. Instead, let us settle upon the most iconic image we have, for instance File:Frederick_Douglass_portrait.jpg this one. Binksternet (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 17:15, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Error- Lucretia Mott in the section Civil War Years

When the article mentions Lucretia Mott as opposing woman's suffrage, it says she opposes it. However, Lucretia Mott is actually described as America's first feminist, and that is inconsistent with the section. If she would be a feminist, of course she would agree with the woman's suffrage! If someone would be as kind as to fix up that section, that would be great. Davylu777 (talk) 20:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Good point. Some sources I found say she inaugurated the women's suffrage movement. I've removed her name and her husband's. Sorafune +1 21:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

A little reading on the subject would show you that she opposed woman suffrage in 1848 when it was brought up in Seneca Falls. Mott came around to the idea within a few years. Binksternet (talk) 15:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Specifically, during the planning of the Seneca Falls convention, Elizabeth Cady Stanton proposed women's suffrage as one of the resolutions to be presented. Lucretia Mott and the three other main organizers were not so much opposed to the idea in theory as they were concerned it was too radical a demand. Mott is famously quoted as saying to Stanton, "Lizzy, thee will make us ridiculous! We must go slowly!" Feeling very pressured to remove the suffrage resolution, Stanton privately asked Douglass his opinion; he felt suffrage was essential and promised to speak in favor of it during the convention. Stanton later wrote that she probably would have backed down and removed the suffrage resolution if Douglass had not pledged his support.70.14.60.212 (talk) 02:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

"I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong."

Source, please, all direct quotes always need a source document! The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 01:07, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, a google book search turns up a speech in which Douglass used the phrase. This one makes it pretty clear that it's a particularly famous saying of his. I don't see a source that says *precisely* that it's something that he was "fond of" saying, though, rather than a notable phrase that he used in a particular speech...can someone clarify this point? I hope this quotation will stay in the lede, because I especially love it!! CordeliaNaismith (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Typo "Douglas" in one reference

In "Biographical information" section, the text for the link to http://www.fdrccf.com/douglass.htm contains a typo of Douglass's name. It should read "Timeline of 'The Life of Frederick Douglass' – Features key political events", instead of current spelling of "Douglas."

The outside website contains the correct spelling in its title. It is possible that the typo in the Wikipedia's page originated in a typo from the outside website, which had been fixed since.

Fixed, 14 Dec 2010

Also fixed same typo in one External link. HairyWombat 18:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 99.189.232.209, 11 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change: "Douglass and Anna had five children: Charles Remond Douglass, Rosetta Douglass, Lewis Henry Douglass, Frederick Douglass Jr., and Annie Douglass (died at the age of ten)." to: "Douglass and Anna had five children: Rosetta Douglass, Lewis Henry Douglass, Frederick Douglass Jr., Charles Remond Douglass, and Annie Douglass (died at the age of ten)." because this is the correct order of the births of his children.

99.189.232.209 (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Why does it matter? →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 03:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:51, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Children's birth order

Please change: Children Charles Remond Douglass Rosetta Douglass Lewis Henry Douglass Frederick Douglass Jr. Annie Douglass (died at 10) to: Children Rosetta Douglass Lewis Henry Douglass Frederick Douglass Jr. Charles Remond Douglass Annie Douglass (died at 10) as these are the correct orders of the births of his children. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.189.232.209 (talk) 00:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

According to this site, the order in the article is correct. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass and his attendance to the founding meeting of the Republican Party..

Douglass's was one of the first Republicans and worked to establish the Republican Party as an abolitionist political party. One of his famous quotes, he said "I am a Republican,a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress."

The Republican Party had been created in 1854 by opponents of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, which allowed for extension of slavery into free territory in the West.

"Frederick Douglass was one of the foremost leaders of the abolitionist movement which fought to end slavery within the United States in the decades prior to the Civil War. He eagerly attended the founding meeting of the republican party in 1854 and campaigned for its nominees.

A brilliant speaker, Douglass was asked by the American Anti-Slavery Society to engage in a tour of lectures, and so became recognized as one of America's first great black speakers. He won world fame when his autobiography The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, in which he gave specific details of his bondage, was publicized in 1845. Two years later, he began publishing an anti-slavery paper called the North Star. He was appointed Minister Resident and Consul General to Haiti by President Benjamin Harrison on July 1, 1889, the first black citizen to hold high rank in the U.S. government.

Douglass served as an adviser to President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and fought for the adoption of constitutional amendments that guaranteed voting rights and other civil liberties for blacks. After the Civil War, Douglass realized that the war for citizenship had just begun when Democrat President Andrew Johnson proved to be a determined opponent of land redistribution and civil and political rights for former slaves. Douglass began the postwar era relying on the same themes that he preached in the antebellum years: economic self-reliance, political agitation, and coalition building. Douglass provided a powerful voice for human rights during this period of American history and is still revered today for his contributions against racial injustice."

nicknames

applesauce jones —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.32.180 (talk) 20:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 12.195.99.107, 22 June 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Add: "While living in Rochester in 1851, Frederick Douglass served as a "station master" of the Underground Railroad. He was a risk-taker when it came to bridging his actions with his beliefs." www.nps.gov. Edanddoll 18:15, June 22, 2011

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I do believe this is probably true but we should have a source for it. Jnorton7558 (talk) 14:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The "station master" part is referenced at http://www.nps.gov/frdo/historyculture/Frederick-Douglass-Chronology.htm Bloody Viking (talk) 14:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Reading over it quickly I can't easily find a place to put it. Changing back to unanswered. 14:55, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request- Possible error in "Life as a Slave"

I believe the time-line here is out of order.

"When Douglass was hired out to William Freeland, he taught other slaves on the plantation to read the New Testament at a weekly Sunday school. As word spread, the interest among slaves in learning to read was so great that in any week, more than 40 slaves would attend lessons. For about six months, their study went relatively unnoticed. While Freeland was complacent about their activities, other plantation owners became incensed that their slaves were being educated. One Sunday they burst in on the gathering, armed with clubs and stones, to disperse the congregation permanently. In 1833, Thomas Auld took Douglass back from Hugh after a dispute ("[A]s a means of punishing Hugh," Douglass wrote). Dissatisfied with Douglass, Thomas Auld sent him to work for Edward Covey...."

1st- Douglas was rented out to Freeland after his year with Covey not before(which the next section correctly states)."

2nd- The Sunday School class that was broken into with stones and clubs took place while Douglas was with Capt Auld (before Covey or Freeland). Douglas states that class lasted precisely three weeks..."While I lived with my master in St. Michael's, there was a white young man, a Mr. Wilson, who proposed to keep a Sabbath school for the instruction of such slaves as might be disposed to learn to read the New Testament. We met but three times, when Mr. West and Mr. Fairbanks, both class-leaders, with many others, came upon us with sticks and other missiles, drove us off, and forbade us to meet again. Thus ended our little Sabbath school in the pious town of St. Michael's."

3rd- The longer class mentioned did take place under Freeland. However, the narrative indicates its time to be closer to a year and it was never broken up like the previous class ,"with sticks and other missiles". Apparently this class continued until the first escape attempt.

I think the confusion may come in the fact that when Douglas is recounted the events of the formation of the second class he speaks to the severe need to keep it a secret as he ponders to the demise of the first class..... "It was understood, among all who came, that there must be as little display about it as possible. It was necessary to keep our religious masters at St. Michael's unacquainted with the fact, that, instead of spending the Sabbath in wrestling, boxing, and drinking whisky, we were trying to learn how to read the will of God; for they had much rather see us engaged in those degrading sports, than to see us behaving like intellectual, moral, and accountable beings. My blood boils as I think of the bloody manner in which Messrs. Wright Fairbanks and Garrison West, both class-leaders, in connection with many others, rushed in upon us with sticks and stones, and broke up our virtuous little Sabbath school, at St. Michael's--all calling themselves Christians! humble followers of the Lord Jesus Christ! But I am again digressing"

So to recap.. There were two classes Class #1- 3 weeks, broken up with sticks, while living with Capt Auld (before Covey) Class #2- about a year, never broken up, while with Freeland (after Covey) Joelkizz (talk) 23:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC) Joelkizz (talk) 06:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

You should change the text yourself. You have the knowledge and skill. Right now there is no article protection from editing, though there may again be protection in the future. Binksternet (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Life as a Slave Section

The article indicates that Frederick was owned by Aaron Anthony then "given" to Lucrectia Auld, wife of Thomas Auld. Point of clarification. Lucretia was the daaughter of Aaron Anthony. Upon the death of Aaron, Lucretia inherited Frederick, along wife several of his siblings and an aunt. When Lucretia died a short time later, Frederick was inherited by Thomas Auld.DickHu (talk) 12:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Reference

• Preston, Dickson J. (1980). Young Frederick Douglass: The Maryland Years. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 62, 91. ISBN 0-8018-2739-6.

Douglass' Role in Women's Rights

This article mentions Douglass' role in women's rights, but could be improved if mention of his work as a feminist came in the introductory paragraph. Frederick Douglass was instrumental in the women's rights movement, encouraging the organizers of the first women's rights convention to include suffrage in their list of resolutions. Douglass' role in the women's rights movement deserves more than just a mention in a small paragraph in the middle of the article. It should be considered, next to his work to end slavery and racism, as his major contribution to the development of our nation and the course of American history. Here is what the revised introduction could look like:

Frederick Douglass (born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey, February 1818[2] – February 20, 1895) was an American social reformer, orator, writer and statesman. After escaping from slavery, he became a leader of the abolitionist movement, gaining note for his dazzling oratory[3] and incisive antislavery writing. He also became one of the nation's first women's rights activists alongside Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other leaders of the women's rights movement. Through his anti-slavery and women's rights activities, he stood as a living counter-example to slaveholders' arguments that slaves did not have the intellectual capacity to function as independent American citizens.[4][5] Many Northerners also found it hard to believe that such a great orator had been a slave.[6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.148.215 (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you that something of this nature should be included in the introduction, but perhaps it should go in the last paragraph. Something like this:

Douglass was a firm believer in the equality of all people, whether black, female, Native American, or recent immigrant. He was particularly active in the women's rights movement. He worked alongside Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other leaders of the women's rights movement, encouraging the organizers of the first women's rights convention to include suffrage in their list of resolutions. He was famously quoted as saying, "I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong."

Would this do the trick?

Bloody Viking (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good, but then the sentence "Douglass actively supported women's suffrage." in the second paragraph of the lead should be taken out. The citation needed is not necessary; the material has citations in the body of the article. [1][2]. --JN466 19:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

On her own in preparation for the Seneca Falls Convention, Stanton came up with the idea of putting women's suffrage on the list of resolutions to be voted on. Douglass's main influence was during that convention when he spoke out very eloquently in favor of the resolution, helping beyond a doubt in achieving a passing vote. Prior to the convention, Stanton had various influences such as her cousin Gerrit Smith who was in favor of women's suffrage, and perhaps Douglass was among her early influences since he was a newspaperman in a nearby town. The point is that the wording in this article should not put too much emphasis on Douglass initiating the idea of women's suffrage. He was critical in carrying the idea forward during the voting but not the originator. Subsequently, Douglass continued to be a big supporter of women's suffrage from 1848 through the '50s, attending many of the women's conventions, but much less so in the 1860s after Stanton and he had a falling out over whether black men were to get the right to vote before white women. Binksternet (talk) 19:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is in line with what the OUP source says.Care to tweak the wording accordingly? --JN466 21:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

How about the version below? Binksternet (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Douglass was a firm believer in the equality of all people, whether black, female, Native American, or recent immigrant. He was particularly active in the women's rights movement. He helped Elizabeth Cady Stanton pass her resolution for women's suffrage at the first women's rights convention. He was famously quoted as saying, "I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong."

I like this wording: good balance, not overstating his role, but making it clear that women's rights were very important to him. Bloody Viking (talk) 15:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Frederick Douglas's Portrait

[copied from my Talk page] I've reverted your edit of my edit earlier because it's time for a clearer image of this great man. Furthermore, the image that was in place before was out of shape in regards to position of hi body and face. If you can find a way to crop that image to give a full view of his face and body then you have my condolences in reverting my edit. Centrist "Joshua" Fiasco (talk) 02:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I reverted you because you replaced a very high quality image that has been selected as a featured picture with a much lower quality image. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I prefer the featured picture at the top. The one swapped in by XCF was blown out—the white parts were bereft of detail.

However, I am sympathetic to proper head room and lead room in a photograph, and the images we get from the 19th century are often accompanied by wa-ay too much headroom. The featured portrait contains this flaw. Perhaps we can treat the featured picture as raw material and crop it to suit modern sensibilities. I've done so for a few articles, leaving the former photograph available for hardliners but offering the cropped version for general use. Binksternet (talk) 05:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 June 2012

This article is poorly written from an historical perspective. It fails to properly cite chronology and is written in a confusing stream of consciousness mode. It should be rewritten as a proper encyclopedic article. HowardCowan (talk) 20:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Unfortunately, asking that an entire article be rewritten is well beyond the proper scope of an edit request. Please be very specific about what you'd like changed, and why. Remember that improvements can be incremental. Rivertorch (talk) 06:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 June 2012

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/senate-bill-would-allow-frederick-douglass-statue-in-capitol/2012/06/16/gJQAksAhhV_story.html To be added under "Legacy and honors"

June 16, 2012: The Senate Appropriations Committee passed bill allowing DC to place statue of Frederick Douglass statue by Steven Weitzman in the Statuary Hall of Capitol Hill. Damonaeio (talk) 15:17, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done for now: Premature. This apparently will need to be approved by the House of Representatives before it's a done deal. Rivertorch (talk) 19:48, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Correcting possible error.

Article refers to Frederick Douglas as first African American nominated to national office. However, this article: http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/samuel_ringgold_ward_oswego.html refers to another African American that may have that distinction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.209.245 (talk) 01:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

The article you link above refers to a nomination that supposedly occurred in 1850, which was not a presidential election year. Further checking may be needed to settle the question. Rivertorch (talk) 05:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Escape from Slavery

In the "From slavery to freedom" section, the following sentence describes the day of september 3, 1838:

"On September 3, 1838, Douglass successfully escaped by boarding a train to Havre de Grace, Maryland."

I suggest changing the sentence to

"On September 3, 1838, Douglass successfully escaped from his master Hugh Auld by boarding a train to Havre de Grace, Maryland."

this clarifies the section because in the preceding paragraph he tries to escape from two different owners, neither of which is the owner of Douglass when he escapes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neoletrix (talk • contribs) 01:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Lloyd?

Douglass first tried to escape from Freeland, who had hired him out from his owner Colonel Lloyd, but was unsuccessful.

But the previous section says that his owner was named Thomas Auld. So who is this Lloyd person? Tad Lincoln (talk) 06:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declaration of Sentiments

Article fails to talk about Douglass's signature on the Declaration of Sentiments, a big part of supporting women's rights.PeterTarkoy (talk) 01:59, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Could you write something up? I see there's a section dealing with Seneca Falls. Rivertorch (talk) 05:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass' Paper

I'm looking to expand some information on the publication of the Frederick Douglass' Paper. Mostly I wish to add history of the publication, its intended audience, etc. Do you feel it would be appropiate to post on this page, or perhaps created a stub?DasMick (talk) 15:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)DasMick

Are you talking about the North Star (anti-slavery newspaper), or the Liberty Party Paper? Binksternet (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Small typo

In citation number 4: Willard B. Gatewood Jr. (January 1981). "Frederick Doulass and the Building of a "Wall of Anti-Slavery Fire," 1845-1846. An Essay Review". The Florida Historical Quarterly 59 (3): 340–344. Should be Douglass, obviously.

 Done Thanks for the note! Binksternet (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Not African American

Neither Frederick Douglass or President Obama are African American. They are African-European Americans. Unless someone can measure them with a spectrometer and make a scientific case that they are more one than the other. LOL Reality is determined by genetics. We are the DNA code that we are. I hope that one day I am considered politically correct enough by the noble rulers of wikipedia to be allowed to edit this page. Until then I expect those in charge of this page to correct this. That is IF this page is seriously about reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.8.156.52 (talk) 20:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ#Q2, it is more or less applicable to Douglass as well. Note that the term African American refers to ancestry, not race.--JayJasper (talk) 04:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 September 2013

HI, HERE ARE TWO ADDITIONS FOR SECTION 10, "CULTURAL REPRESENTATION:"

Douglass's time in Ireland is fictionalized in Colum McCann's 2013 novel "TransAtlantic."

A comedic representation of Douglass is made in James McBryde's novel "The Good Lord Bird" in 2013.

Mitchroper100 (talk) 17:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

SOURCES:

TRANSATLANTIC: <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/books/review/transatlantic-by-colum-mccann.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>

THE GOOD LORD BIRD <http://www.amazon.com/The-Good-Lord-Bird-Novel/dp/1594486344>

THANKS!

Mitch Roper

 Done. Thank for the info.--JayJasper (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Organization/citations needed

Although I don't claim to be a Douglass expert, I just revised his page to better meet Wikipedia standards, organizing it more chronologically. Many aspects do not have citations. I added some online cites concerning his religious background because it was completely missing, although very important to the man. I don't have time to work more on this, and hope others can fill in the needed citations. One minor matter, which indicates the page's problems, is that PBS.org says his eldest son fought in the Civil War, but the wikipedia page originally gave a different first name, as well as a specific battle reference. I've left both in, with the citations needed tag.Jweaver28 (talk) 19:19, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

In briefly returning to this page this morning, I addressed some wordiness/grammar problems, but also wondered about calling him just Frederick in the two sections about his life before he assumed the Douglass surname, since he certainly would not have called himself Douglass in that period. However, I know the use of first name only itself also has connotations of slavery. Plus I haven't read his autobiography in years. This topic may well have come up in archived discussion threads, which I frankly don't have the time to try to find. Any ideas?Jweaver28 (talk) 14:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The only instance I can find is this: "young Frederick lived with his maternal grandmother". (Maybe you changed the others already?) It doesn't bother me because it's referring to a child, but calling him Douglass before he took the name Douglass also doesn't bother me. It would be confusing to call him Bailey, and calling the adult Douglass "Frederick" is problematic for the reason you alluded to. (Of course, the truth is he was a slave at that time, but that doesn't mean we should participate in slavery's dehumanizing conventions after the fact.) Rivertorch (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Folks, I appreciate your efforts here. I pay a lot of attention to this page, though most of my edits have been in the "Life as a Slave" section (I live 3 miles from his grandma's cabin, where he was probably born). I am very interested in trying to raise the quality, and apply for A-class rating (do you know how to do that?). To that end, I just bought Frederick Douglass: a critical reader by Bill E. Lawson and Frank M. Kirkland. Over the next few months, I'll try to find some citations therein that will improve the article. Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Content: Expand Section 3.4

Also not a Douglass expert, I propose an addition to the section regarding his work in women's rights; that work extends past the bounds implied in section 3.4. The proposed addition goes as follows, in the midst of the present section:

Also in the wake of the Seneca Falls Convention, Douglass used an editorial spot in his paper, The North Star, to press the case for women’s rights in this public venue. The article was two-fold: it recalled the “marked ability and dignity” of the proceedings and briefly conveyed several arguments of the convention and feminist thought at the time. On the first count, Douglass acknowledged the “decorum” of the participants in the face of disagreement. The latter half discussed the primary document that emerged from the conference, a Declaration of Sentiments, and his own discussion of the “infant” feminist cause. Strikingly, he expressed the belief that “[a] discussion of the rights of animals would be regarded with far more complacency…than would be a discussion of the rights of women,” and Douglass noted the link between abolitionism and feminism, the overlap between the communities. His opinion as the prominent editor of the paper likely carried weight, and he stated the position of The North Star explicitly: “[w]e hold woman to be justly entitled to all we claim for man.” This letter, written a week after the convention, reaffirmed the first part of the paper’s slogan, “right is of no sex.” Skclaypoole (talk) 18:05, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Skclaypoole (talk • contribs) 18:03, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2014

There is a minor typo, repeated twice, in the Religious views section. In both cases, Douglass' name is written as "Dogless". The phrases in which these instances appear are: "Doglass was mentored by Rev. Charles Lawson" - after the long quotation and "Doglass asked British Christians never to support American Churches that permitted slavery" - two paragraphs lower than the previous quote

I am new to editing Wikipedia, so if someone could fix it, that would be nice.

Thank you,

Akelley3 (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing out the errors. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2014

In section 12, "D. in Arts and Literature," please insert as the first item: Edmund Fuller's 1946 novel A Star Pointed North (New York and London: Harper & Brothers) was acclaimed as having "bridged an aching gap in American history," presenting "with dignity and warmth," after decades of "shameful neglect," a "Negro hero . . . as the American hero that he was." Fuller follows closely the known facts of Douglass's life from slavery onward, taking reasonable liberties as a novelist to portray Douglass as a complex human being of great insight and political astuteness. CAH-phd in MI (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

References

I don't see why a fictionalized novel from 1946 should be accorded a place of importance in this biography. The novel was not otherwise notable; it did not win awards or gain wider notice. It is an interesting book, certainly, but probably more important to Fuller than to the legacy of Douglass. Binksternet (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Douglass "From Slavery to Freedom"

In this section, the current article states "Young Douglass reached Havre de Grace, Maryland, in Harford County, in the northeast corner of the state, along the southwest shore of the Susquehanna River, which was the border with Pennsylvania and flowed into the Chesapeake Bay." The reference to the Susquehanna River is incorrect. It flows south across the Pennsylvania border and into Maryland, and then flows into the Chesapeake; at no point does it form "the border with Pennsylvania." It might be more to appropriate say that Harve de Grace's position on the river was "near" the Pennsylvania border. 108.48.8.175 (talk) 13:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Sloppy wording, possible rephrase needed.

[Years in Washington D.C.]

"Many African Americans, called Exodusters, escaped the Klan and reimposed racially discriminatory laws in the South by moving to large northern cities, as well as to places like Kansas where some formed all-black towns to have a greater level of freedom and autonomy."

 It makes it sound like the Exodusters reimposed racially discriminatory laws in the South by moving to large northern cities. Efcmagnew (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Son Charles Douglass

The section on the war years incorrectly identifies Charles Douglass as Frederick's oldest son, when in fact he was his youngest son. The passage also mentions that Charles served in the Massachusetts 54th Infantry, which is correct, but implies that he did not serve long due to health. In fact, he later transferred to the Fifth Cavalry and served in Virginia until late 1864. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.153.247.160 (talk) 15:24, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Douglass in Arts and Literature Edit Request 2/18/15

Could someone edit the section of Frederick Douglass in the Arts and Literature Section? The thing that I want added to that section is about his role in the North American Confederacy Series by L. Neil Smith, in which the Whiskey Rebellion is successful and the government is reformed in 1794. In the series, Frederick Douglass served as the 16th President of the North American Confederacy from 1888 to 1892 and is succeeded by Benjamin Tucker and predeceased by Jean-Baptiste Huang. If the page wasn't protected, I would have edited the article myself. --75.68.122.13 (talk) 15:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Jacob Chesley the Alternate Historian

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2015

plse let me edit so that I can show people that Wikipedia is so useful for people.

71.170.62.59 (talk) 00:08, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

 Not done This is not the place to request additional user rights. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Douglass Statue at West Chester University

A new statue of Douglass was placed in front of the Phillips Memorial Building at West Chester University FYI. Do the wikipedia thing. http://tk4photo.photoshelter.com/gallery/Frederick-Douglass-Statue-unveiling-at-West-Chester-University/G0000K_pjRt6qQyM/

https://www.wcupa.edu/pr/2013/8.20statue.asp  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.125.48.238 (talk) 04:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC) 

Plagerism from the Title Paragraph

The title paragraph:

> Frederick Douglass (born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey, circa 1818 – February 20, 1895) was an American social reformer, orator, writer and statesman. After escaping from slavery, he became a leader of the abolitionist movement, gaining renown for his dazzling oratory and incisive antislavery writing. He stood as a living counter-example to slaveholders' arguments that slaves did not have the intellectual capacity to function as independent American citizens.

Has been copied wholesale onto the back of the 2013 release by the Newcastle Group of "Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass An American Slave" ISBN: 9871629100081

This publication does not seem to carry an attribution or a copyleft license, so it seems to be in violation of WP:REUSE.

This paragraph I've traced back originally to user Paulmlieberman's revision of this page on 13 October 2010.

I'm not much of a wikipedia editor, so I'm unsure of what the proper steps to take from here are.

76.97.189.129 (talk) 01:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I only wrote the last sentence of the paragraph (I may have tweaked some of the rest of the paragraph). I later went back and found the citations I added at the end of the sentence. I don't know if there is a good reason to claim copyright violation, especially since the total paragraph they lifted actually had (probably) many authors, and none of it is original research. If anybody knows who at Wikipedia would be able to answer such a question, please put in your two cents here. Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Apparently, the answer is "No". Lifting Wikipedia material is not plagarism, according to the article referred to here.[3] Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Paulmlieberman: It is plagiarism and copyright violation, especially if they don't credit Wikipedia and use as a contributor. But as soon as their is credit, it both complies with Wikipedia's licencing and best practices for academic fair use. Sadads (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Douglass and Howard University

Frederick Douglass had a lot of influence on Howard University in particular and served on its board of Trustees. A District of Columbia landmark and Howard University building, Frederick Douglass Hall is dedicated to him. I would love for the articles to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.88.96 (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

@71.114.88.96: Great Idea! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for sharing your thoughts about the direction of this article. Despite the herculean work of previous editors, there is still much work to do with him here. Douglass was a giant in both the history of the US and the Atlantic World. This article should reflect his legacy. So, please, jump in, learn the basic steps to writing in WP, do your historical research about Douglass in Howard, and get the necessary sources to validate your points. Discuss it here with us if you must, and start adding your thoughts to the article while also staying attentive to the views of others. I left a message in your (Talk Page) welcoming you to WP and offering a few links to pages with the necessary information to begin your wikipedian adventure. I support your idea and hope you will help ake your contributions soon. You can contact me for help. Cheers, --Caballero/Historiador (talk) 06:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

A typo

"Neil Gwynn House" should be "Nell Gwynn House".

Gyrae (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

@Gyrae: Thanks! It is done.  Done Caballero/Historiador (talk) 22:15, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass Institute and Memorial at West Chester University of Pennsylvania

https://www.wcupa.edu/_academics/fdouglass/ Please consider adding information about the FDI and memorial plaza located at West Chester University of PA, where Douglass gave his last public speech. The monument is also a registered historical national monument.

Thank you, Diane Rogers144.26.117.20 (talk) 14:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Additional Legacy and Honors item

On November 18, 2015, the University of Maryland College Park dedicated a new statue of Douglass in the new Frederick Douglass Square of Hornbake Plaza.

[4]

68.134.232.154 (talk) 18:43, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Copy editing

I made some copy changes to this article, but they were reverted by Caballero1967. I won't go into detail about all my changes, but here are explanations for some of the more pertinent ones:

• "The exact date of Douglass's birth is unknown. He later chose to celebrate it on February 14. The exact year is also unknown" - When I read "the exact date of Douglass's birth", I assumed this also meant we don't know his year of birth. It seems to me that the first and third pieces of information are related, and would be better combined into a single statement.

• "When Douglass was about twelve years old, Hugh Auld's wife Sophia started teaching him the alphabet. Douglass described her as a kind and tender-hearted woman, who treated the boy the way one human being ought to treat another." - This lacks a clear citation. The text "who treated the boy the way one human being ought to treat another" at least needs quotation marks because that isn't encyclopaedic language talking. As it has no clear citation I just deleted it; I thought it might even have been original text, not a quotation, because it's not clear and is obviously POV.

• "education and slavery were incompatible with each other." "with each other" is redundant.

• "Mrs. Auld" is not neutral encyclopaedic language - we should use Auld, or spell the name out in full if it's not clear which Auld we mean.

In my opinion the article could benefit from rewriting generally; the prose is kind of muddy in a lot of areas. Popcornduff (talk) 13:42, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

The statements about his birthdate were made (by me) in an attempt to stop frequent changes to these data a few years ago. The most common was changing the year from 1817 to 1818 or back to 1817. If you would like to try improving the wording, go for it! Paulmlieberman (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

NPOV

It seems that some parts of this article portray an idolizing/POV tone. I have added NPOV template for it and already deleted one such example of POV. Any help is appreciated!--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 16:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Unless you give some concrete examples of this tone you dont like, I am going to have to remove the template.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:38, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I can see that the text as it was may seem POV, but without the text

"A firm believer in the equality of all peoples, whether black, female, Native American, or recent immigrant," there is no context for the quote "I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong." I am sure we can come up with more citations to verify the statement if we need to, but this is the lede of the article, and I would argue that the rest of the article supports this statement. Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I dont see how a statement of belief, supported by sources can in anyway be non neutral. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The statement of belief is presented in such a way as to imply egalitarianism is objectively "right", in Douglass' terms.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 16:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

No it is not, it simply states that he believed in it firmly. Saying Hitler was a firm believer in the superiority of the nordic race, or that Marx was a firm believer that Capitalism would soon come to an end, also do not suggest anything about the correctness of those beliefs. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:59, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Than the quote should reflect such, the current quote does not match the belief. Again, it implies that egalitarianism is the "right" philosophy, which is biased. FYI Hitler believed the Caucasian race was superior and the Nordic ethnicity was the most distinct of such, and Marx's beliefs were far more nuanced than "capitalism would soon come to an end".--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 17:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

You are misreading the quote. The part that shows his belief in egalitarianism is not that he thinks it is right, but the part where he would unite with anyone to do right - showing that he judged people on their actions not on their identities and commonality of cause. FYI, Hitler did not once in is life use the words "Caucasian race" or "Nordic ethnicity".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Well of course he never said "Caucasian race", he spoke German! I'm just using that as a modern translation of "Aryanische rass", as the NSDAP included ethnicities from Bedouin to North Indian to Ukrainian in its diagrams. Regardless, as for the topic of this debate, all I'm implying is that a simple rewording may be in order to seem less awkward and implying.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 17:19, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Arisch and Kaukasisch are two different words in German, and come from two different traditions of racial classification. Hitler and his race scientists used the former and I have never heard that he should have used the latter.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

• The neutrality policy does not mean that we cannot describe the positve or negative aspects of a topic or person, but that we have to do it proportionally to how those aspects are described in the literature. We should of course avoid "peacock terms" that artificially inflate a biographic subjects importance, but as long as the terms are well supported by sources, and the remarkable qualities of the biographic subject are well established then the use of even highly positive phrasings are not non-neutral. To argue that the article is non-neutral one would have to provide sources that contradict the sourced statements and demonstrate that they have a significant standing in the literature about Douglass.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

But isn't what is "negative" or "positive" in a person *incredibly* subjective and subject to the modern worldviews/culture/faith/etc of Wikipedia's majority editors and bureaucracy? See WP:BIAS, and the recent restructuring of the article God.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 17:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes it is. Which is why we follow the sources and not our own ideas about what comes across as "too positive" or "too negative".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

• It is a misunderstanding to parse the quote to mean that what is "right" is egaliatarianism. The point of the quote is that doing the right thing is more important than the identity category of who you do it with. I.e. it shows that he did not believe in discrimination based on identity, but only based on commonality of values. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Maunus. It feels like this is just a misreading of the quote; in context, the part of the quote that reflects his egalitarianism is the "I would unite with anybody" part. The "...to do right..." part doesn't refer to Egalitarianism; it's just him saying that he is willing to ally with absolutely anyone for a cause that he agrees with. --Aquillion (talk) 17:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Allright, I'm glad I got a second opinion at least, but I still feel like it's worded a bit awkwardly. Is there any way to clarify it at all?--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 18:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I have provided context for the quote, which actually was given in the context where Douglass explained his willingness to uphold the Union between North and South, to dialogue with slaveowners about abolition, and to work within the framework of the constitution in spite of it having been written by slaveowners.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:09, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

OK, that's fine. I'm done here, the only request I have left is to skim over the article for other quotes that be POV or lack proper context.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 21:20, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Even Northern audiences

The citation given states that "Douglass would often encounter disbelief from White audiences about his former slave status, because he spoke so eloquently in public." The article states that "Even many Northerners at the time found it hard to believe that such a great orator had once been a slave." I don't believe that the assertion made by the article (that Northerners would usually be prone believe such a thing, but many did not) is supported by the work cited (which implies that disbelief from White audiences, regardless of geographic location, was widespread).

Chaim1221 (talk) 08:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chaim1221: Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the Talk Page. Could you clarify your argument? Are you saying that the article here is asserting or implying that Northerners were more "prone" to distrust Black talent as oppose to have said that such a malady was universal among Whites? If this is what you meant, I agree with the last part of it (on the universality of distrust), but do not see the article stating that Northerners were more "prone" than Southerners or even Westerners (i.e., everybody). I see the article asserting that "Even many Northerners" distrusted, strongly implying that Southerners were, of course, obviously distrusting. However, if you indeed read it in this way, the sentence then should have room for improvement. Could you suggest a better rewrite? Moreover, you may have noticed that the source is not the ideal type (WP:HISTRS). Could you suggest a better one? If you can't find the necessary help with sources you need here (WP:LIB), let me know if I could help instead. For the moment, I have good access to sources. Welcome! Caballero/Historiador ^⎌ 09:10, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I've changed the citation to a more authoratative source. Paulmlieberman (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the citation, Paul, and for the welcome, Caballero. I didn't have a particular problem with the citation, however. Yes, it is the language of the sentence; the exceptional case. "Even" many Northerners implies that while we expect the behavior from Southerners, we would not normally expect the behavior from northerners "but for" this case. Since it's not a scholarly assertion and the language used is somewhat of a euphemism for what the originally cited article actually says ("whites"), the edit I would suggest is to simply say that "Whites at the time found it hard to believe that such a great orator had once been a slave." Chaim1221 (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Further commentary: Now what we've done is we've replaced the citation with one that supports the text, instead of changing the text. Upon further reading of this new citation, I still cannot support the claim that "even many Northerners" thought he was not a slave; moreover, the assertion in the text by Matlack seems to be that Northerners unanimously did not trust Douglass' representation of himself as a former slave, to the extent that his advisors counseled him to provide an exact accounting of dates, times, and places that he was a slave. So, while the verbiage in the new text supports the assertion that Northerners did not trust him, it does not support the assertion that many northerners did trust him, or the inverse assertion that "Even many Northerners" did not trust him. So I'd revise my previous suggestion to read "Northerners at the time did not believe that such a great orator could have once been a slave." Chaim1221 (talk) 21:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Feuerbach was an atheist - and Strauss also: Religious views section needs better sources, context and summary

Feuerbach's book 'The Essence of Christianity' is currently cited as being on Frederick's shelf in support of the idea that Frederick was a religious man. However, Feuerbach was an atheist and the book was a critique of Christianity. This should be changed, IMHO. -anon

The article contains this statement: The fireplace mantle features busts of two of his favorite philosophers, David Friedrich Strauss, author of "The Life of Jesus," and Ludwig Feuerbach, author of "The Essence of Christianity. I find this impossible to believe as these were both writers who heavily criticized Christianity and denied some of the most basic and important aspects of it. For example. Strauss denies the divinity of Christ - see his book 'The Life of Jesus', chapter 3 which critiques the supernatural character of the conception of Jesus.

I am certain that this statement regarding these two philosophers cannot be true - based on the faith of Frederick Douglas - it must have been maliciously inserted. Please investigate and remove if you agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.97.14 (talk) 15:56, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

(appended section name at issue) I agree that this juxtaposition of two prototypical freethinkers amidst the jarring claim of their personal religious significance to Douglass struck me as quite odd, and lacking in both context (his views changed) and reputable scholarly references. But the library busts are real enough. What they meant to Douglass in the 1890s is at issue. Last paragraph of Religious views:

Sometimes considered a precursor of a non-denominational liberation theology, Douglass was a deeply spiritual man, as his home continues to show. The fireplace mantle features busts of two of his favorite philosophers, David Friedrich Strauss, author of "The Life of Jesus," and Ludwig Feuerbach, author of "The Essence of Christianity." In addition to several Bibles and books about various religions in the library, images of angels and Jesus are displayed, as well as interior and exterior photographs of Washington's Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church.

Throughout his life, Douglass had linked that individual experience with social reform, and like other Christian abolitionists, he followed practices such as abstaining from tobacco, alcohol and other substances that he believed corrupted body and soul.

References

It certainly needs to be re-written from better, reliable sources. Some exist. First, see the National Park Service photos of Douglas's statues of Strauusand Feurbach (both busts circa 1890s). Next, a letter of May 15, 1871 from Douglass's freethinking close female friend, Ottilie Assing (from source cited on that article page) to Feurbach, and finally an astute analysis of his evolving views on religion, with more sources cited, on page 141 from The Cambridge Companion to Frederick Douglass. Like most thinking men, his views changed. That makes him no less a saint for those who insist on hagiography, but for those who don't, the facts are friendly. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 08:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Ottilie Assing

Two sentences about Ottilie Assing are needed (in the section "Douglass refines his ...") to give credit to the importance of her intense exchange with Douglass over two and a half decennies. Something along the lines: Douglass met Ottilie Assing in 1856, when he gave the German journalist and radical thinker an interview. From then on «Ottilie Assing and Frederick Douglass enjoyed one of the most productive and complex relationships in nineteenth-century America» (Henry Louis Gates, Jr., Harvard University) «Christoph Lohmann's collection of the writings and letters of Ottilie Assing illuminates a unique storehouse of radical antislavery, anticlerical, and feminist thought from the mid-nineteenth-century...[It] shows Assing to be, one of the keenest observers of American politics, reform, and culture in the age of the Civil War.» (David W. Blight, Amherst College) The quotes are from amazon page about Christoph Lohmann, "Radical Passion": https://www.amazon.com/Radical-Passion-Ottilie-Frederick-Douglass/dp/0820445266

Maybe one could also refer to her in the "Religious views" section, as she introduced Feuerbach s critique about christianism to Douglass. See "Letter to Ludwig Feuerbach from Ottilie Assing about Frederick Douglass": http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/dougls1.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.97.88.87 (talk) 12:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC) 188.97.88.87 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Source and Bias evaluation

This article has far too many direct quotes. Though mainly from Douglass, some are only barely attributed: "One biographer" for example. There are also several sweeping claims about what Douglass "believed" that are biased and debatable. Also, the Family Life section seems out of place. It should appear earlier in the article. Taylolya (talk) 00:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Links needed for quaker family and more

In the first paragraph, second sentence

" ... movement from Massachusetts and New York ..."

New York and Massachusetts were mentioned and these locations can be linked to articles. Also, it was mentioned in the Abolitionist and Preacher section, towards the end,

"... At a lecture in Pendleton, Indiana, an angry mob chased and beat Douglass before a local Quaker family, the Hardys, rescued him."

To be more clear on what a quaker family is it can be linked to the wikipedia article, "quakers".

SuchSingh79 (talk) 15:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Linking to the articles for Mass. and NY won't add much to the article. As to Quakers, the first mention of the word quaker in the article is "Quaker City" (Philadelphia), so the link to the article on quakers would go there. What's really apparent from looking at your suggested links, Singh, is that it would be beneficial to readers of history for Wikipedia to expand the article Abolitionism in the United States with sections on the movement in each state. Why don't you work on making that happen? Paulmlieberman (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Frederick Douglass. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/DouMybo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110317031836/http://www.civfanatics.com:80/civrev/great_people to http://www.civfanatics.com/civrev/great_people

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) 03:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Trump

Does Trump's off-the-cuff comment really belong in "Legacy and honors"?--Jack Upland (talk) 08:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think it does. Keeping it there opens the door for adding all sorts of laudatory but mostly empty quotes about Frederick Douglass from other politicians and prominent people. However, if a writer or two has used Trump's comment as a take-off to write about how it reflects Douglass' legacy in the modern era, then I think that would be worth including. Bobnorwal (talk) 13:27, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

While the Cheeto-in-Chief's comments were amusing -- especially the impression they give that he thinks Douglass is still alive -- they don't belong in the article. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 14:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't really want to get involved in Trump related stuff, but this let me to the Frederick Douglass Cell Phone Foundation which is extremely bizarre. Doug Weller talk 15:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, it seems at least as noteworthy as some bridges being named (or "co-named") for Douglass. Time will tell whether there's any enduring scholarly or general interest in this one whack thing that Trump said (there are already so many, after all), but in the context of some of the other entries in the section it seems reasonable to include it. (@Doug Weller: I don't want to get involved in that stuff either, but I've found it has a way of following me to the unlikeliest places, on and off wiki.) Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 16:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the comment is notable. People have commented on it as a criticism of Trump.--Jack Upland (talk) 18:25, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Does the basis of people's commenting on it affect its notability, do you think? Some people were baffled by it, others jumped to conclusions, and still others (e.g., Douglass's descendants) responded to the responses. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 19:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it definitely does. There was a flap about this, but Wikipedia is not news. Trump's ramblings were badly received, but that does not make it a "legacy and honor" for Douglass.--Jack Upland (talk) 19:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Right. What I meant was that if Trump had said something surprisingly coherent about Douglass, I wouldn't suppose that would make it more noteworthy (for the purposes of this article, anyway). As for "not news", yes...and yet there are so many exceptions made to that tenet. It's a useful rule, but sometimes it's applied too loosely. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 04:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the comment because there seems to be a consensus against this. The flap now seems to have died down.--Jack Upland (talk) 20:58, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

If Fredrick Douglas was a live today facing problems that black American face today racism property homeless jobless what one think you think he would focuse on Spucknic (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2017

you need to find Frederick Douglass full name Marksclay (talk) 23:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 05:14, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2017

Laurwarr (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

{{subst:trim|

Children- Rosetta, born about 1839, Massachusetts Lewis H., born about 1840, Massachusetts Frederick. born about 1842, Massachusetts Charles, born about 1845, Massachusetts Anna, born about 1849, New York

reference- United States Census 1850 https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HY-XXZ3-6J1?mode=g&i=7&cc=1401638 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurwarr (talk • contribs)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  05:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Birth year of Frederick Douglass

In his autobiographies (Library of America) he states, "I suppose myself to have been born about the year 1817". Wikipedia states "1818".

  2017 is the 200th anniversary of his birth. CommonReader (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please read the first paragraph under Life as a slave. And see this. The fact is, we don't really know, and neither did Douglass. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 19:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Native American link needed

Second paragraph, end of last sentence

"...whether black, female, Native American, or recent immigrant."

black, female, and immigrant have links to other articles

I believe that Native American could get a needed link by linking it to "Native Americans in the United States" article

Thanks!

James Rollinson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfrollinson (talk • contribs) 14:29, 01 February 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

The link appears to have been added. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 19:52, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect statement about 2017 quarter

Under "Legacy and Honors", it says that an image of Douglass is on the front of a 2017 "America the Beautiful" series quarter. This is incorrect; it should say he is on the back of the quarter. According to their own article, the front side of those quarters use the same George Washington head that has been in use for quarters since 1932.2600:1015:B120:604B:1A7A:BA73:A971:12FE (talk) 21:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Done Izno (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, the standard terminology for coins isn't front and back but rather obverse and reverse. I have modified the wording accordingly. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 04:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Frederick Douglass. 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 http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20090708000612/http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/douglass/part4.html to http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/douglass/part4.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060211042543/http://winningthevote.org/FDouglass.html to http://winningthevote.org/FDouglass.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/republican/features/convention.history
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120211125917/http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/douglass/home.html to http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/douglass/home.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060211042543/http://winningthevote.org/FDouglass.html to http://winningthevote.org/FDouglass.html

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) 08:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Frederick Douglas Edits

Hello Wikipedia users and contributors,

I am interested in Frederick Douglass, he is a hero of mine and I have ordered his last biography, "The Life and Times of Frederick Douglas". It is for this reason that I was perusing the wikipedia entry on Douglass, when I noticed that some of the writing carries some old-fashioned gender bias, and I ask that you update the language. The language we use to express historical fact often carries unwitting bias, and un-intentionally, this is how world views are shaped.

In the FROM SLAVERY TO FREEDOM section.

1. "In 1837, Douglass met and fell in love with Anna Murray, a free black woman in Baltimore about five years older than he. Her free status strengthened his belief in the possibility of gaining his own freedom.[26]" This is strange no? If the genders were reverses, wouldnt this be a strange sentence? I wonder why the author thoight it pertinent to include that she was 5 years older than he. Would they have included this fact if she was 5 years younger?

2. "Once Douglass had arrived, he sent for [his wife] Murray to follow him north to New York." Was she his butler? If, again, the genders in this sentence were reversed, wouldnt this be an odd way of putting this? Douglass was himself was famously vocal about his belief in equality between the sexes/ It's doubtful to me he "sent for" his wife.

In the WOMEN'S RIGHTS SECTION:

"After Douglass's powerful words, the attendees passed the resolution.[53][54]"

When I went to the sources listed above, I saw that factually, the attendees passed the resolution after Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mary M'clintock and other suffregettes spoke. The author has cut two of the most important leaders of the suffragette movement out of the sentence.

Thank you so much!

23.242.75.11 (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

1) We have a page on Anne which includes her birth-date, I agree that her age isn't necessarily pertinent here. 3) I agree, I think that the resolution passed can be moved into the sentense above and that whole phrase can be dropped. 2) I'm not sure, I read "sent for" so often when reading about people from this era, I am used to it and it doesn't sound odd. Can you propose a different wording that conveys the state of affairs? Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:50, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Frederick Douglass. 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/20091124061924/http://www.yale.edu/glc/archive/1121.htm to http://www.yale.edu/glc/archive/1121.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://thelouvertureproject.org/wiki/index.php?title=Frederick_Douglass_lecture_on_Haiti_%281893%29
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120093702/http://www.fdrccf.com/douglass.htm to http://www.fdrccf.com/douglass.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123101217/http://tkffdn.org/what/location/fdg.php to http://www.tkffdn.org/what/location/fdg.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707064229/http://www.43places.com/places/view/3017188/frederick-douglass-circle-central-harlem-harlem to http://www.43places.com/places/view/3017188/frederick-douglass-circle-central-harlem-harlem
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707064238/http://www.43places.com/places/view/3017189/frederick-douglass-statue-frederick-douglass-circle-central-harlem to http://www.43places.com/places/view/3017189/frederick-douglass-statue-frederick-douglass-circle-central-harlem

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) 14:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Is there really no WikiProject for African American Writers or African American History?

It seems very inappropriate not to have such WikiProjects going. Perhaps someone should start one? Alialiac (talk) 00:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:African diaspora is the closest thing we have. WP:WIR does a lot of women of color drives, and might be is the most active project working in the area. Smmurphy^(Talk) 01:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

What's the point of even mentioning that? Obviously you wouldn't classify Douglass in such a project. Alialiac (talk) 01:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not trying to offend you, just noting where to go for active collaboration in the area you mentioned. There is also WP:CSB, but that isn't very active. Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:29, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Clarify, please

After the Civil War, Douglass remained an active campaigner against slavery

What does this mean? Slavery had been abolished. Valetude (talk) 11:02, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Slavery had been abolished in most of the United States, yes, but not in the rest of the world. See Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom#1850–1899. Enslavement of Africans wasn't officially ended by many of its practitioners until the Brussels Conference Act of 1890 took effect in 1891. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Douglass sources online

My good friend Dr Robert Hume has just had a relevant article published by the Irish examiner, viz: https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/lifestyle/features/irish-womens-fight-against-slavery-during-the-great-famine-868307.html Would be very grateful if tis link could be added to the above section on this page.Jeffvagg (talk) 13:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2018

Add to bibliography: John Stauffer, Zoe Trodd, Celeste-Marie Bernier, Picturing Frederick Douglass: An Illustrated Biography of the Nineteenth Century's Most Photographed American. Liveright Publishing Corp., 2015. John Stauffer, Giants: The Parallel Lives of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln. Twelve, Hatchette Book Group, 2008. John Stauffer, The Black Hearts of Men: Radical Abolitionists and the Transformation of Race. Harvard University Press, 2001. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The bibliography is for sources which are used in the article.  Spintendo  01:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 November 2019

Add to Bibliography: Fought, Leigh. Women in the World of Frederick Douglass. New York: Oxford University Press, 2017. 67.249.32.187 (talk) 17:56, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. There's plenty there already. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:09, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Native American ancestry

The cited source doesn't back up its claim to Douglass' mother having Native American ancestry, not going much beyond conjecture based on his physical appearance. I think a better source is needed. Totorotroll (talk) 20:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Ottilie Assing

I removed the detail that Assing "fell passionately in love" with Douglass, taken from The New Yorker. There are surely better sources about Douglass than The New Yorker. From David Blight's biography, I got the impression that while Assing perhaps was "passionately in love", Douglass wasn't, and that they possibly never had a sexual relationship. So the words "passionately in love" might not be exactly wrong, but misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsk6400 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the New Yorker is not a reliable source, but Blight says she found him as her "Siegfried," & was "utterly infatuated" with him, [p.318] and stayed at the Douglass house as his "intellectual and emotional companion." "Assing and her host were probably lovers." [p. 387]. So "passionately in love" may be a fair paraphrase.ch (talk) 05:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I read the book some time ago, but have been vainly searching for that page for some time. --Rsk6400 (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it's interesting that Blight makes this comment only in passing, not in one of the featured passages on Assing/ Douglass in the index. Don't know what this means! ch (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

To become a good article

I think the article still has some issues:

At the end of the lede, it says, "Douglass was a firm believer in the equality of all peoples." Maybe he said that about himself, but in Blight's book there are some remarks on his position on the "Indian question" that call for a more profound elaboration of that point.

The section "Religious views" should be re-considered. Much space is given to his youth and to his opposition against "slaveholder religion", while his positive views on religion as an adult are to be found only in the last paragraph. That last paragraph is mainly based on an article from "Religion News", which probably is no scholarly source. It is also misleading to present Strauss as the author of "The Life of Jesus" and Feuerbach as the author of "The Essence of Christianity", because the titles of both books give the wrong impression that they are written by pious churchmen, while in fact Feuerbach was an atheist and Strauss was an outspoken critic of Christian doctrine.

In general, journalistic sources should be replaced by scholarly ones. --Rsk6400 (talk) 08:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this a good article?

I've done a modest amount of editing on this article, (mostly the lede and his life under slavery). It really bothers me that the article has not achieved good article status. If I didn't have a full-time job, I would take on the (somewhat daunting) task of getting it there. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time, and I don't know how much trouble it might stir up to make the changes needed to get to Good Article status. I'd like to hear what other editors think about this. Paulmlieberman (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Paulmlieberman#top I have just come across this article and thank you for your work. In my experience, the Good Article status comes from the accumulation of small changes, not a massive, one time investment. You would be doing a great service to begin the process. ch (talk) 05:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Douglass (and the users) surely deserves a good article. But, he was a true giant, fascinating and complex. So it will be a challenging task to improve this article. I just started a new section with some ideas. --Rsk6400 (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Birth year, again

Over the years, there have been a number of edit wars over when Douglass was born, 1817 or 1818. He stated in his first autobiography that he, like most slaves, didn't know his birth date, or his age, not exactly. Many sources state 1818. On page 2 of his third and final autobiography, he gives his best guess as 1817: "I suppose myself to have been born in February, 1817." Based on this, his own statement, I have changed the dates to 1817. In the Infobox, I show both years; this time, they both have cited refs. I hope this doesn't start another edit war.Paulmlieberman (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

There should be a space after the reference in -> "and Lucretia Mott.[72]Douglass stood"

Gentle Feather (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you! Paulmlieberman (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

American Orator versus Abolitionist

I see that Google returns Douglass as an American orator in their knowledge panel rather than as an abolitionist, which I presume they pull from the Wikipage. I came to check. The content of Douglass's oration was centered unequivocally on abolition. It seems a disservice to his legacy to prioritize his oratory skills above the message of his content. Harriet Tubman, for instance, is listed as an American abolitionist. I argue Douglass should be seen as the same - American abolitionist who was also a great orator. Petepetey (talk) 12:38, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Petepetey, I would like to see Douglass' google panel show him as an abolitionist as well as an orator, but, your statement about his oration is not true. If you read the entire article (or one of his autobiographies) you will see that his activism went much further. He was involved in women's rights and other causes. He was surely the greatest African-American orator alive from 1845 to his death in 1895, and, arguably, the greatest American orator of that time, period. Also, I've looked at the source of the Wikipedia article text, and I do NOT see anywhere in it that calls him an orator without also mentioning his abolitionism, so Google must have gotten that from someplace else. Paulmlieberman (talk) 14:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Not disagreeing with any of this. Just was trying to determine the source of listing him solely as an orator. I have alerted Google to my concerns. Thanks. Petepetey (talk) 12:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Frederick Douglass (circa 1879).jpg scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture File:Frederick Douglass (circa 1879).jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 3, 2020. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2020-10-03. Any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be made before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:59, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass (c. 1818 – 1895) was an escaped slave who became an American social reformer, abolitionist, orator, writer, and statesman. He was separated from his mother as an infant, raised by his grandmother till the age of six, and was then owned and hired by a succession of masters. Escaping by railroad in 1838, he settled in New Bedford, Massachusetts, then an abolitionist center full of former slaves. He became a national leader of the abolitionist movement in Massachusetts and New York, gaining note for his oratory and incisive antislavery writings. This photograph of Douglass was taken around 1879.

Photograph credit: George Kendall Warren

Recently featured:

• Lake Palčje
• White-necked laughingthrush
• Long Island City

"Bristol Anti-Slavery Society"

The separate links for "Bristol" and "Anti-Slavery Society" refer to the English city and to British societies.

The group referenced, however, would be the Bristol County Anti-Slavery Society, mentioned in the article "Abolitionism in New Bedford, Massachusetts."

Please replace those links with a single link to that article.

Curmudgeonly Pedant (talk) 15:51, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

They do indeed, but a source would be needed for the "Bristol County Anti-Slavery Society" having arranged Garrison's lecture at Liberty Hall where Douglass first heard him, per Life and times of Frederick Douglass, written by himself : Douglass, Frederick, 1818-1895, p. 264. We wouldn't want to upset the "Ladies of the Bristol Anti-Slavery Society". . dave souza, talk 18:38, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

The open letter to Thomas Auld, former slave master

Douglass’ corpus of writing contains so many well-crafted and powerful speeches on the subject of slavery and abolition that it is obviously impossible to integrate even a small fraction of their text into this wikipage. However, standing apart in character and form is the open letter he wrote and published in 1848 to his former slave master, Thomas Auld. It was much more than is currently described—a letter “berating [Auld] for his conduct, and inquiring after members of his family still held by Auld” (see Return to the United States). Rather, Douglass uses the letter as a platform to encapsulate his being: his life under slavery, escape, personal transformation, assessment of his former master, analysis of the nature of man, current life and pursuits, and fundamental sense of justice and benevolence. The letter itself serves as a vehicle for demonstrating through its eloquence and subtle rhetorical mastery that Douglass is a person of unsurpassed intellectual abilities—an implicit but devastating refutation of the ideologic premises of the institution of slavery. I propose for the present to significantly expand the notes on and quotes from the Auld letter. But long term, I suggest the letter deserves its own Wikipage, as have his other writings and speeches (see Works). Thoughts? Zatsugaku (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2020

"Change Murray-Douglass to Murray Douglass" Mdwfree (talk) 04:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:11, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2020

During his lecture tour of England, on March 26, 1860, Douglass delivered a speech before the Scottish Anti-Slavery Society in Glasgow, "The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Antislavery?", outlining his views on the American Constitution.[84] Should be,

During his lecture tour of Great Britain, on March 26, 1860, Douglass delivered a speech before the Scottish Anti-Slavery Society in Glasgow, "The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Antislavery?", outlining his views on the American Constitution.[84]

as Glasgow isnt in england 2001:16B8:2CD9:5500:8C33:C573:D757:77BC (talk) 22:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Good catch. Done. (Everyone should visit Scotland.) Zatsugaku (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Popular Media Addition

Someone please add that Douglass is depicted in "Our Nation's 200th Birthday, The Telephone's 100th Birthday" by Stanley Meltzoff for Bell System? https://www.jklmuseum.com/tag/stanley-meltzoff 47.152.71.253 (talk) 21:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I recently discovered that in 2018, US President Trump claimed Douglass was still alive and doing “great work”. I find it a shock this is not included in the article. Although Trump is a sensitive political issue, a fact is a fact and this should be noted. I don’t have the proper experience editing Wikipedia pages to do it myself, but I hope somebody with those skills can add this fact. Here is a link to a Washington Post article to verify the event. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/02/02/trump-implied-frederick-douglass-was-alive-the-abolitionists-family-offered-a-history-lesson/?outputType=amp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.235.68.109 (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I may not like him, but was he really being literal when he said that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.15.96.125 (talk) 18:22, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2021

To add section 12 and add the subsection "Painting". For this subsection I suggest the "Frederick Douglass" series (1938-39) painted by Jacob Lawrence. Full text below

Doing... ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 11:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done - Special:Diff/1013392056 ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 11:24, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Painting

In 1938-39, African-American artist Jacob Lawrence created The Frederick Douglass Series of narrative paintings. They were part of the historical series started by Lawrence in 1937, which included painted panels about prominent Black historical figures such as Toussaint Louverture and Harriett Tubman. During his preparatory work, Lawrence conducted research in the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture materials–primarily drawing from the autobiographies of Frederick Douglass: Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave (1845) and Life and Time of Frederick Douglass (1881). For this series the artist used a multipanel-plus-caption format that allowed him to develop a serial narrative that was not possible to convey by means of traditional portrait or history painting. Instead of reproducing Douglass’s original narratives verbatim, Lawrence constructed his own visual and textual narrative in the form of 32 panels painted in tempera and accompanied with Lawrence’s own captions. The structure of the painting series is linear and consists of three parts (the slave, the fugitive, the free man) which offer an epic chronicle of Douglass’s transformation from slave to leader in the struggle for the liberation of Black people. The Frederick Douglass series is currently in the Hampton University Museum. Artsyrobot (talk) 11:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

References

Caro ref

@Deisenbe: you've added a ref named "caro", but did not define it. Could you please fill that in? Thanks. -- Fyrael (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. deisenbe (talk) 09:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2021

Was 77 years old when he died, not 78 96.41.250.208 (talk) 19:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I've noted that the age at death is approximate, because his date of birth is not known with certainty. —C.Fred (talk) 19:52, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ross Blair – Frederick Douglass.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:29, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Frederick Douglass - District of Columbia.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass Ref issues

Upon further review of source I notice that the ref: Burlingame, Michael, Abraham Lincoln: A Life, vol. 1, p. 526, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008 does not meet what was written by editor: and made "blatant assertions of white superiority." here is the Ref I found https://www.knox.edu/documents/LincolnStudies/BurlingameVol1Chap6.pdf Robjwev (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Robjwev: The pdf you found (thank you for finding it !) is the manuscript version, which is longer, see here. So we can assume that the page numbers are not identical. @Maurice Magnus: Maybe you could have a look at the pdf and give the exact page of the text corresponding to p. 526 of the printed edition. --Rsk6400 (talk) 12:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Robjwev: @Rsk6400: See my edit. Is it what you suggested?Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wonderful, thank you. --Rsk6400 (talk) 13:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Yea Im good, thanks Robjwev (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge

Wonodah216 (talk) 11:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Should add a section under Legacy and honors about the New Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge https://www.newfrederickdouglassbridge.com/

Semi-protected edit request of 17 September 2021

Excellent article, only in the second paragraph I found something that probably ought not to be there. The last sentence in Paragraph two starts: "Without his permission, Douglass became the first African-American nominated for...". I suppose "Without his permission, " is extra and should be deleted. Remnant of a previous version of the text? Act of vandalism overlooked? Thanks 31.30.70.42 (talk) 06:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, Douglass was indeed nominated without his knowledge, and thus also without his permission. --Rsk6400 (talk) 09:42, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Erin.s.hall, ESutt.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Straus and Feuerbach

I refer to this sentence, which appears in the final paragraph of the section "Religious views": The fireplace mantle features busts of two of his favorite philosophers, David Friedrich Strauss, author of "The Life of Jesus", and Ludwig Feuerbach, author of "The Essence of Christianity"[dubious – discuss].

I looked in the index of Blight's biography. Strauss is not there, but Feuerbach is, on pages 514-515. Blight writes that Ottolie Assing tried "to convert him [Douglass] to atheism via the writings of Ludwig Feuerbach." Blight has four long paragraphs -- the first two discuss Feuerbach -- on Douglass's religious views. I leave it to another editor to make use of them, if one wishes to.Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:49, 20 June 2021 (UTC)Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:50, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

The presence of the busts in Douglass' home isn't "dubious", nor is his interest in Strauss and Feuerbach. Both are attested in reliable sources, such as The Cambridge Companion to Frederick Douglass. The problem is that his interest in them isn't given any useful context in the article as currently written. I'm going to remove the "dubious" tag, because what is said isn't dubious, even if there is more that could be said about why he was interested in their ideas. --RL0919 (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2022

Frederick Douglas is portrayed in the film Emperor (2020) by Harry Lennix. Role about 1hr 5 mins into film. 159.196.171.204 (talk) 07:18, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Zippybonzo (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Frederick Douglas (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Misspelling

Funeral paragraph, misspelled (Rocheater’s) change to Rochester’s premier memorial park HenryMaxMilton (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

More in Literature

A new musical "American Prophet - Frederick Douglass in His Own Words", based on a book by Charles Randolph-Wright and Marcus Hummon debuted in July 2022 at Arena Stage in Washington, DC SJRockower (talk) 16:50, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

The "Composite Nation" speech

@Antandrus, Maurice Magnus, TimBentley, Paulmlieberman, CzarB, Ian Pitchford, Parkwells, Znoisuled, and Deisenbe: I am referring this to you SMEs.

As of 20 October 2022 there is no mention of the "Composite Nation" speech in the article, yet it appears to be important to Frederick Douglass's biography. Apparently he delivered it over & over, & it seems to be highly relevant to today's America. Here are some citations:

• Blake, John (2022-10-11). "It's one of the most radical and prophetic speeches in American history. And hardly anyone knows about it". CNN. Retrieved 2022-10-20.
• "Our Composite Nation: Frederick Douglass' America". New-York Historical Society. 2022-09-21. Retrieved 2022-10-20.
• Blight, David W. (2019-11-09). "Frederick Douglass's Vision for a Reborn America". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2022-10-20.
• Frederick Douglass' Composite Nation on YouTube
• "Frederick Douglass Papers: Speech, Article, and Book File, 1846-1894; Speeches and Articles by Douglass, 1846-1894; 1867, "Composite Nation," lecture in the Parker Fraternity Course, Boston, Mass.; 2 of 3". The Library of Congress. Retrieved 2022-10-20.
• "(1867) Frederick Douglass Describes The "Composite Nation"". Welcome to Blackpast. 2007-01-28. Retrieved 2022-10-20.

I would work on this myself, but I am currently much involved with WikiConference North America 2022 that is occuring Veteran's Day weekend. I am hoping that I can prevail upon you to include this as according to its importance. Peaceray (talk) 05:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Tonymartin: This may interest you. Peaceray (talk) 05:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Source of Douglass surname

For what it’s worth: His freedom surname 'Douglass' was taken from James Douglas, the hero of Walter Scott's 'The Lady of the Lake'. When he first came to Edinburgh in 1846 he was struck not only by the city's beauty but also by the fact that while living here he felt treated as an equal. Jo3sampl (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jo3sampl: do you have a citation for that? Peaceray (talk) 05:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Just — Frederick Douglass | National Library of Scotland National Library of Scotland › exhibitions › frederick-douglass Thumbnail image His freedom surname 'Douglass' was taken from James Douglas, the hero of Walter Scott's 'The Lady of the Lake'. When he first came to Edinburgh in 1846 he ... — (couldn’t find more on the site). Jo3sampl (talk) 23:31, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Douglass and cigars

The article currently has this:

Throughout his life, Douglass had linked that individual experience with social reform, and like other Christian abolitionists, he followed practices such as abstaining from tobacco, alcohol and other substances that he believed corrupted body and soul.

But, I just read David Blight's recent biography of Douglass which plainly states (p. 514): "Douglass loved cigars." Ditto another book: "Douglass loved cigars."

So, which is it? Did he change his mind later? Which way did he change it? How do we reconcile this? I have added a {dubious} tag to the sentence in the article.

References

For your perusal, TuckerResearch (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@User:Tuckerresearch Stauffer and Blight, who are both respected Douglass biographers, disagree about whether Douglass used tobacco. I don't think that the way to handle this is with a {dubious} tag. The way to handle it is simply to report both their views. I propose: Throughout his life, Douglass had linked that individual experience with social reform, and, according to John Stauffer, like other Christian abolitionists, he followed practices such as abstaining from tobacco, alcohol and other substances that he believed corrupted body and soul.[footnote] According to David Blight, however, "Douglass loved cigars."[footnote]. Maurice Magnus (talk) 02:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I think that is a reasonable way to put it. (I rather think he probably started his career abstaining from cigars, and then probably picked it up later as he softened/altered some of his views on things. But I have no citations for that.) TuckerResearch (talk) 15:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Done. I moved "he" so that it wouldn't appear that Stauffer was the Christian abolitionist. Maurice Magnus (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2023

you have an extra comma between "the 23 year old, Frederick Douglass-- that comma is grammatically incorrect. Thank you. 47.189.142.68 (talk) 17:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done It's correct, the first word is "Then", not "the". Rsk6400 (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Inset

In the inset at upper R, don't just name a cemetery and call your job done. Would you name a city and town without the state? Add the cemetery's city, state, and for that matter if not the U.S., country. I mean, which 'Rochester'? Massachusetts? New Hampshire? Minnesota?

Otherwise, keep work the good up.

Jimlue (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Douglass's father

Until July 3, under "Birth family," this article stated, "his father was 'almost certainly white', according to historian David W. Blight in his 2018 biography of Douglass." It cited Adam Gopnik's New Yorker article. This statement was false, because Blight's book did not say that Douglass's father was "almost certainly white." Rather, Gopnik wrote that Blight "shows" that Douglass's father was "almost certainly white." But, again, Blight didn't say that.

Therefore, on July 3, I edited it to state, "his father was 'almost certainly white', according to Adam Gopnik, reviewing David W. Blight's 2018 biography of Douglass." But this isn't quite accurate either, because Gopnik was not expounding on Douglass; he was falsely attributing the statement to Blight.

What Blight says is that Douglass said that his father was white. That is sufficient for our purposes. We can cite Douglass, without mentioning that Blight quoted him, and without mentioning Gopnik's false statement about what Blight wrote. Maurice Magnus (talk) 18:22, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

In making this edit, I deleted the references to Blight's book and Gopnik's review of it. Blight is cited numerous times in the article, but Gopnik's review is not cited. Because it is a substantial work, I added it to "Newspapers and magazine articles." Maurice Magnus (talk) 19:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2023

"Adam Gopnik, "American Prophet: The gifts of Frederick Douglass", The New Yorker, October 15, 2018, pp. 81–82" this source does not exist. 46.239.92.3 (talk) 06:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

There is an online version of that article, which says at the bottom that it appeared in the printed issue under the title "American Prophet". --RL0919 (talk) 07:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Here's the full online citation:

• Gopnik, Adam (2018-10-08). "The Prophetic Pragmatism of Frederick Douglass". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2023-07-26.

Peaceray (talk) 23:54, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Under "Newspaper and magazine articles," I replaced the Gopnik listing with your version; thanks. Maurice Magnus (talk) 19:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Why I changed the title of Douglass's third autobiography in the endnotes

I have a facsimile edition of Douglass's third autobiography, as published in 1881. Endnote 3 in Life and Times of Frederick Douglass confirms that it was published in 1881, and that it was titled, as my facsimile edition is, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, Written by Himself, His Early Life as a Slave, His Escape from Bondage, and His Complete History to the Present Time. In the endnotes to Frederick Douglass, the title of the book was given as The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, from 1817 to 1882 and the year of publication was given as 1882. This title and year refer to the British edition and can be viewed by clicking on the arrow at the end of endnote 1 of Frederick Douglass and going to page 9 of 499. I changed the British title to the American title because I believe that the first edition should be cited. (I neglected to change "(1882)" to "(1881)," but I will do so shortly.) I have not changed from the British publisher (London: Christian Age Office) to the American publisher (Hartford, Conn.: Park Publishing Co.), because the link in each endnote that cites the book takes us to the British edition. I appreciate that having the American title and year but the British publisher is inconsistent, and if someone thinks that we should deal with this differently, then you can say so. Maurice Magnus (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, when I changed the title, I thought that The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, from 1817 to 1882 was a mistake -- probably from a later edition, not from the first British edition. Had I known that, I wouldn't have changed it. But I am not going to revert what I did, because I don't think that it is important enough to go back through multiple edits. Maurice Magnus (talk) 22:05, 14 August 2023 (UTC)