Talk:Philip Reed (sculptor)

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

Untitled[edit]

I would like to know how to edit the title for this article, so that the first letter of both the first and last names are capitalized. Tonymartin 18:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use the "move" button up top. Some editors seem to be concerned about the notability of the subject- this is probably because the article does not follow the Manual of Style and doesn't even mention who Phillip Reid is or why we should care about him. --Wafulz 22:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance. I was successful, at least in part. It now appears that I am a victim of my own success and will likely need administrator help in correcting the title spelling. It should be "Philip Reid".Tonymartin 06:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List it at WP:RM. Be sure to read the instructions. --Wafulz 17:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compensated emancipation, not "Emancipation Proclamation"[edit]

I edited a link in the article to correctly indicate that Philip Reid gained his freedom through compensated emancipation, not Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. In DC, the government freed all of the slaves but then paid the owners for their "losses"; although this was a proclamation of sorts and it freed the slaves there it shouldn't be concerned with the real Emancipation Proclamation itself, which freed the slaves in the Confederacy. Bry9000 (talk) 00:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture[edit]

How was it determined that Philip Reid is the man depicted in that picture? The picture is a famous 1815 engraving of a slave coffle walking through the capital. I have never seen any names attributed to the men featured in the picture, and the picture's date indicates that it could not have been Reid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.33.170 (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What picture? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 22:51, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

If the section currently called "Notes" was integrated into the main text, would it be possible to do away with the word "references" in every single citation? Mragsdale (talk) 16:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done as per good suggestion. Separated into two subsections (PR+Statue, and Burial+Reburial). Added Reflist template and turned [References 1] [References 2] etc into shorter [1] [2] etc refs. Improved meaning of a couple of sentences. I'll leave someone else (please) to sort out the "Notes" section - ie. exactly where and how they are/were meant to fit in. The article's interesting, but needs a picture (maybe of Reid's/Reed's grave) and an "Infobox Person" to complete it, it. it would make it a more attractive article. Pete Hobbs (talk) 14:30, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the article to Philip Reed (sculptor) because he wanted to have his name spelled "Reed" after he was emancipated and that's the way his name was spelled in public records.–CaroleHenson (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]