Talk:Lawrence Milner

Start

Started stub Aboudaqn (talk) 20:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice new article. I'd consider taking it over to WP:DYK to get it put up on the front page of wikipedia!.

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 20:45, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that in 1939, Lawrence Milner testified against Australian-born longshoremen union leader Harry Bridges in what Time magazine called "the most important deportation hearings of the decade"?
  • ALT1:... that one of the legacies of the hearing (in which Lawrence Milner perjured himself) was the Smith Act of 1940, written so federal authorities could deport Bridges in a future attempt—which in turn led to the Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders (1949–1958)?

Created by Aboudaqn (talk). Nominated at 23:58, 5 January 2020 (UTC).

• @Aboudaqn: New enough and long enough. No QPQ needed (currently at 1 DYK credit). An inline citation is needed at the end of the last paragraph that starts "The Smith Act led in turn...", which might be best done by combining it with the paragraph above it. ALT0 is OK for use (I have reworded it a bit and uncapitalized Time per WP:MOS); ALT1 is too long at 264 characters and has been struck.

• I notice several wire service articles don't list the supplying agency. {{cite news}} has an "agency" field that can be filled.
• One more thing. It's good practice to clip articles you find at newspapers.com to make their contents more accessible. To do that, you do need a subscription: see WP:TWL to learn how you can apply for one through Wikipedia. I have clipped all newspapers.com citations in this article for you, as I happen to have one myself.

• All in all, the inline citation issue needs to be fixed and then this can be given a tick. Raymie (t • c) 23:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Raymie,  Done — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 23:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Perfect and ready to roll with ALT0 only. Thanks, Insertcleverphrasehere. Raymie (t • c) 23:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Lawrence Milner

On 1 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lawrence Milner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1939, Lawrence Milner testified against Australian-born longshoremen union leader Harry Bridges in what Time magazine called "the most important deportation hearings of the decade"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence Milner. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lawrence Milner), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des​ 06:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 12:03, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Aboudaqn (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Notability

Despite the title, this article is currently not about Lawrence Milner. It dives into undue background detail about the apparent one event Lawrence Milner is known for, with scant relevant info about Milner himself. Unless Milner has enduring, significant coverage beyond a single trial, it may be best just to merge mention/discussion of Milner to Harry Bridges or similar article per WP:SINGLEEVENT. Notability is not inherited, and Wikipedia is not a Who's Who. --Animalparty! (talk) 04:30, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

--Animalparty! As you can see in the article, the (currently) 2nd reference cites a forthcoming article from historian Vernon Pedersen specifically about Milner, so, if I may, I would recommend that you shelve the "notability" issue for (hmmm... considering how slowly academia moves) about a year and revisit whether to remove Major Milner in January 2021. How does that sound? Aboudaqn (talk) 14:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It's the other way around. We don't make articles because they may be covered in depth in the future. Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, does not jump the gun. And as you admit, academia can be very slow: it may be well over a year before such article is published, and for the interim, we would have an article that is predominantly about another person's trial, with a few paltry nuggets tossed towards Milner. And to your first point, it's not "seen" in the article: the "citation" to Pedersen's ostensible article is only a title of an unpublished manuscript, which must be confirmed by searching elsewhere, (i.e. this page from a Google search). And even in the event it's published, we'd have exactly one in-depth source, and a series of news clippings with passing mention. I certainly don't think all mention of Milner needs to scrubbed from Wikipedia, but contend he currently does not appear to warrant a stand-alone article from the available evidence. Any article that must refer to him can provide all relevant context with "Lawrence Milner was an officer who lied under oath in a highly publicized case". No article needed. It may be best to move this to a draft until the point when there is adequate coverage in reliable sources to warrant an article devoted to the subject. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Added quote with citation that Milner "brought the State of Oregon into the plot" against Australian-born longshoremen union leader Harry Bridges in what TIME magazine called "the most important deportation hearing of the decade."Aboudaqn (talk) 14:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

You've provided evidence that the trial may be notable. Not everyone who took part deserves their own stand-alone pseudo-biography that is in actuality just about the trial. See WP:SINGLEEVENT. You should make an article about the trial, discussing Milner in due proportion to other aspects. Nearly every source here is about the trial first and foremost, "with Milner mentioned". The "Background" and "Legacy" is nearly entirely irrelevant to Milner, and instead about Bridges and the trial. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

References