Talk:Anselm J. McLaurin

Quote in footnote removed

It is common, in some places, to use a footnote to add a colorful anecdote, or additional explanatory material, not fitting into the flow of the main document. That practice is generally not encouraged in Wikipedia, as far as I can tell. I posed the question here. While the full community has obviously not weighed in, the consensus appears to me that quotes should be revered for two related classes of use:

1. In a case where there may be controversy about a particular fact, and whether the cited reference supports that fact, the use of the quote will make it easier for readers and editors to reach their own conclusion, by citing the specific quote used to support the fact. This is particularly important where a reference may be not online, or behind a pay wall.
2. When an opinion is paraphrased, the quote will help readers and editors determine whether the paraphrase is accurate.

This article did have a quote in a footnote, and it is my opinion that the quote does not support either use listed above, thus I have removed it, or truncated it. Should anyone disagree, or feel that there are other examples of allowable quotes, feel free to start a discussion. I suggest here, if you disagree with my conclusion that this quote doesn't fall into one of those two examples, or at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#.22brief_verbatim_textual_excerpts.22_revisited if you feel there should be other allowed uses.SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

You say, "thus I have removed it, or truncated it."  Did you not know when you posted whether you were going to remove it or truncate it?  As for the statement above, "the consensus appears to me...", just how did you weigh into the "consensus" the statement at WP:NFC, "...but totally removing the quote is IMO vandalism."  What is the relationship between this 1908 newspaper quote and WP:NFC, is it not the case that this newspaper quote is now in the public domain?  What is your analysis of the statement at WP:NFC in relationship to this article's quote, "If an editor doesn't like the length of a quote, he/she should consider reducing its length..."?  Also, please note that the section here that your comment refers to as "a footnote" is called "References".  Editors have commented at WP:NFC about the benefit of protecting against dead links.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Robin Williams

Since Anslem McLurin was Robin Williams' great grandfather and since McLaurin was his middle name, Williams belongs as a category!--24.186.96.236 (talk) 13:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I stand behind adding the category of Robin Williams because family members get the category from George Washington to Ronald Reagan. McLaurin was even Williams' middle name plus he bears a striking resemblance to the man, so the category belongs. Don't stub the man out of spite.--24.186.96.236 (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

If Zelda Williams can get her father included in her categories, so can his great-greatgrandfather. ALL family members get the category.--68.192.236.182 (talk) 03:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)