Jump to content

Talk:Mississippi in the American Civil War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proposed merger (redirect of "Republic of Mississippi" to this article)

[edit]

"Republic of Mississippi" article for deletion discussion

[edit]

In addition to the merger discussion above, there is a separate discussion for deletion of Republic of Mississippi at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Mississippi Red Harvest (talk) 07:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]
Republic of Mississippi
1861–1861
Motto: Virtute et armis
Map of the Republic of Mississippi on January 9, 1861
Map of the Republic of Mississippi on January 9, 1861
StatusUnrecognized state
CapitalJackson, Mississippi
Common languagesEnglish (de facto)
GovernmentRepublic
Governor 
LegislatureLegislature
• Upper Chamber
Senate
• Lower Chamber
House of Representatives
History 
• Established
January 9 1861
• Disestablished
February 4 1861
Population
• 1860
791,305
CurrencyUS Dollar
Preceded by		 Succeeded by
United States of America
Confederate States of America

Since the merger of the Republic of Mississippi article with this one, this article has become the place for any relavant information regarding the secession of Mississippi. The infobox is one such piece of information. One of my specialties is American History, and I have done extensive research on the American Civil War. You cannot possibly argue that the Republic of Mississippi did not exist. Anyone who does so has no knowledge of the American Civil War at all. There is plenty of documentation confirming the existence of such an entity in 1861. Please stop deleting the infobox. Anasaitis (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No sources for the existence of such, it is gone. Editors can't just go around making up names for states. That was the reason these articles were deleted in the first place. You seem to have an affinity for these dubious infoboxes. There is already a valid state infobox, this second one is both superfluous and speculative rather than supported by sources. Red Harvest (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A strong case using reliable secondary sources would need to be made in order for me to agree with insertion of the above infobox. Insertion of such a template constitutes undue coverage, IMHO. If indeed the user has done extensive research, it should be a simple matter to produce several sources from mainstream or scholarly publishers to prove the point. BusterD (talk) 22:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the unsigned item from the state webside is a reprint of a column by Leslie R. Myers. She is a columnist on surrent events & an art critic and not a historian or specialist on the 1860s. She cites no sources for her speculations, and twice says the name was "Sovereign Republic of Mississippi" -- not "Republic of Mississippi" the way the Infobox claims. That term "Sovereign Republic of Mississippi" was coined in the 1950s by anti-segregation activists. see Yasuhiro Katagiri (2007). The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission: Civil Rights and States' Rights. Univ. Press of Mississippi. p. 199. A controversial claim needs a much better RS. Rjensen (talk) 03:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am a flag buff, and the Flags of the World website says that there is not a scrap of evidence, physical or documentary, that this flag was used during the American Civil War. I never heard that Mississippi called itself anything but a state even during the brief interval between secession from the United States and accession to the Confederate States, and lacking reliable evidence, I think the infobox should go. J S Ayer (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More than a year's gone by and no sources have been added to support its inclusion, so I'm implementing consensus and removing. Mojoworker (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The flag is still there, in another infobox, protected by a comment that it is not to be removed, per an archived discussion in another article's talk page. I looked at the archived discussion, and it does not support this assertion. Repeat, the serious students of flags say that the evidence demonstrates that this flag was only used after the War Between the States. It must come off this page. J S Ayer (talk) 01:51, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice it was there too. Despite the section title, the discussion referenced in the comment wasn't tagged as a formal RFC and wasn't closed, and appears to be a discussion of an different flag issue – the Confederate national flag. Supporting your assertion that the flag we are discussing here "was only used after the War Between the States", [1], says it "was likely a post-war flag, designed for use by one or more of Mississippi's United Confederate Veterans units. Then over time, it was mistakenly identified as 'the' Magnolia flag." Any thoughts on what is the correct flag that should be in the infobox (or should it just be removed)? Mojoworker (talk) 07:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ditch it. J S Ayer (talk) 02:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had planned on waiting a few days to see if anyone else weighed in, then forgot about it. I saw in my watchlist that you removed the flag from the infobax. I concur with that action. Mojoworker (talk) 16:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The flag has been reinserted as part of a massive edit, mendaciously marked "minor", by a contributor who does not discuss. I will revert, and I fear this will end in arbitration. J S Ayer (talk) 13:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mississippi in the American Civil War. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mississippi in the American Civil War. 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:

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) 12:07, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mississippi in the American Civil War. 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:

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) 14:18, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Mississippi

[edit]

Why in God's name does Republic of Mississippi redirect to this article, yet the term "Republic of Mississippi" is mentioned nowhere in the text of the current version of this article. That's not very encyclopedic, is it? 98.123.38.211 (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mississippi_in_the_American_Civil_War&oldid=1241018569"