Talk:J. Samuel Walker

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Maryland Low‑importance

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

Administrators or Whoever deleted and redirected from The Writings of J Samuel Walker

There is good important data which is now lost which took a long time to accumulate. The least that could have been done would have been to have pasted into this page.

If possible please contact me or paste that data here so it does not have to be rebuilt from scratch. ...

assume good faith

errata for incorporation into main

Reviewed by Roger Chapman (American Culture Studies Program, Bowling Green State University) Published on H-US-Japan (November, 1999)

2

Citations to follow they are shutting this place down... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidgood (talk • contribs) 02:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3

Perhaps this should have been a stub proposal but it seemed like a good idea to get the ball rolling someway or another. We are shutting down for holiday season so if the page languishes to the point that it gets deleted I would appreciate if someone paste the article onto my page so I don't have to start from scratch.

The original inception of this stub or proposal was to do justice to the good faith of the people who set up the Hiroshima debate. IMHO they interjected a somewhat incorrect opinion by Walker who overemphasized one aspect of the very complex Hiroshima matter.

Since I deleted one little item I thought it would be appropriate to express my concurrence with their high regard for Walker by proposing this page. I did that by starting the page. It will not be able to evolve as rapidly as I would wish due to the inter-semester layoff.

My personal laptop happens to have fried also and so I was planning like the rest of the world to take a break between Dec 24 and Jan 1. If there is a world of deletion prone editors I would appreciate if they would consider starting the Walker article with added content. I think his work is pretty worthwhile and it is better to get the ball rolling. What harm is there in that? At what point does administrative deletion merge over into a form of vandalism in its own right???

CHRISTMAS SABBATTICAL

I'd appreciate if this page is not NUKED during the intersemester time period. I know there is a lot of issues with it and it is currently the writings of Walker not a personal biography. But the topic is important enough. Let it be.

Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.

That is the problem with all of this destructive administrative blasting. It gets old fast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidgood (talk • Wikidgood (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)contribs) 01:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

agenda

add citations

add bio info reformat

Easy does it Peace Dove

easy does it this is not controversial the only issue is time and the holiday break and difficulty of finding sources and such this is an evolving page not any kind of improper bio...the subject is a public figure as well thanks Wikidgood (talk) 22:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers![reply]

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Net change: citations added and Citation tophat replaced with broader clean up tophat

"Tophatting broader cleanup request in lieu of citations; no contentious material, old tophat not specific; also citations are in and pending...cleanup can include more citations too"

This does not imply the citations are finished.

There is nothing contentioous or potentially libelous thus the old top hat is not specific enough.

Now that there are citations it is...

all of the self justification I have had to waste time on this week has cut my constructive concrete factual content waaaay down...Wikidgood (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't get this split box quite right I need a main article box anyway :( SOS

Citations number exceeds two more prominent historians

Robert WIstrich 4 note Thomas Kuhn (spelling) 8 notes this page 8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidgood (talk • contribs) 23:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]