This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Brown's Fort article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from John Brown's Fort appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 August 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Wikipedia! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.FirefightingWikipedia:WikiProject FirefightingTemplate:WikiProject FirefightingFirefighting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles
Section about NY Times assessment of the Fort's condition in 1882edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Should it stay? should it go? I trimmed it a little but should it be trimmed more? What say you, interested editors.... Shearonink (talk) 04:21, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
The fact that the roof and windows were gone is not found elsewhere and supports the later statements that the building is not 100% authentic. deisenbe (talk) 13:36, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
That's a pretty modest point, one that can be expressed in less than the 137 words of the quote we presently have in the article. In my opinion, block quotes are appropriate when we want to highlight an important or poetic point made by a noteworthy and relevant person. Quoting a New York Times article, written by an unnamed person, does not call for a block quote. Let's keep things simple, write that the fort was in disrepair, and, then, cite the NYT article. Thanks, Attic Salt (talk) 03:49, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Unless, there are significant objections, I propose (as I've done before), removing the block quote. We are supposed to be writing an encyclopedia, not pasting from other sources. Attic Salt (talk) 16:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletionedit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
