Talk:Legal status of Texas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
This article was put together using the same general presentation style as found in the Legal status of Hawaii article. I think that approach works here but please offer suggestions if an alternative approach would be better. LarryQ 19:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- I revised the intro and hope you find it helpful. I suggest you move or add the 2 key books about the movement to a section on sources or bibliography or references. I also think some of the statements/claims would benefit from a source citation or quote. Good luck. HG | Talk 03:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC) PS I'm assuming that this article was made due to the topic's independent notability. As you may know, it isn't appropriate (and likely wouldn't be effective) to prepare an article merely to WP:POINT make a point regarding another article, e.g. Hawaii.
- Thanks, this is helpful. I will work on your suggestions.
-
- "As you may know, it isn't appropriate (and likely wouldn't be effective) to prepare an article merely to WP:POINT make a point regarding another article, e.g. Hawaii." I agree, that would not work. And the article I am going to write about the Legal status of Alaska is because it is a notable topic too. All three states have minority movements arguing the legal status of the states. A look on the Web will ID them for you pretty quickly. I think I am pretty balanced in coverage when writing on these groups I just want the articles to follow the UNDUE rule. These are notable disputes but the de jure status of the states as American is pretty strong. LarryQ 12:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Article Problems
Most of the information in this article is unsourced, it clearly has an agenda, and it makes extremely specious claims without any evidence to back them up. On top of that, the style of the opening section is not in the slightest bit encyclopedic and instead reads more like the home page of a website, or a sloppily written essay. If this article can't be revised to NPOV on this issue, if it can't be properly sourced, and it can't be written in a style appropriate for Wikipedia, it ought to be deleted.Antodav2007 (talk) 17:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- This article is part of a series which includes the legal status of Hawaii and the legal status of Alaska. In particular, please read the extensive discussion page regarding the legal status of Hawaii. That article has been repeatedly challenged. I think you may some of your concerns voiced and addressed there. I believe this article is NPOV as it shows both sides of this topic while also showing that the view that Texas is legally American is the majority one. LarryQ (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
