Talk:Newton Arvin

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 00:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger

I think that neither Edward Spofford nor Joel Dorius is sufficiently noteworthy in his own right to merit a wikipedia entry. Both are noteworthy only for being swept up in Newton Arvin's affair. I don't think we want an entry called "the Pink Scare," so I think that the material now included in the entries for Spofford and Dorius should be merged into the Newton Arvin entry. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 04:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Merged. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

These entries are out of place here and stand out like a sore thumb. If they fail the notability test—which I think they do—they should be eliminated. I will excise them after a few days unless someone disagrees.~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 14:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

These are not entries as such. Just additional information about the players in the events and arrests. They are minor figures that were caught up in the same web as Arvin. That's why they were merged into this entry in the first place. They fail notability so they do not have their own entries. That's what the notability test is for. It doesn't determine whether or not they get mentioned here or in how much detail. They were notable in no other way, but they certainly deserve mention here. How much? probably not as much detailed info as there is now. Much of the detail could be relegated to a long footnote about each, I suppose. Certainly the later career of each could be covered more briefly, without giving each of them a "heading". Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I've modified/condensed the treatment of Dorius and Spofford. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Newton Arvin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726004624/http://www.artsandletters.org/academicians2_deceased.php to http://www.artsandletters.org/academicians2_deceased.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)