Talk:Thomas Paine/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Thomas Paine. 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/20101205004955/http://www.thetgram.norfolk.sch.uk/History.htm to http://www.thetgram.norfolk.sch.uk/History.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090418233236/http://www.thomaspaine.org/bio/ConwayLife.html to http://www.thomaspaine.org/bio/ConwayLife.html

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 12:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC) –  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  10:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thomas Paine. 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/20150904024401/https://books.google.com/books?id=k1y62LnUMu4C&pg=PT801&lpg=PT801&dq=Thomas+Paine+had+passed+the+legendary+limit+of+life.+One+by+one+most+of+his+old+friends+and+acquaintances+had+deserted+him.+Maligned+on+every+side,+execrated,+shunned+and+abhorred+%E2%80%93+his+virtues+denounced+as+vices+%E2%80%93+his+services+forgotten+%E2%80%93+his+character+blackened,+he+preserved&source=bl&ots=u-TkRdSLyh&sig=zzAGLHnlKjthhGV41JEoY95TD60&hl=en&sa=X&ei=D0KPUuO8IZOA2AWb7YCIDg&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBw to https://books.google.com/books?id=k1y62LnUMu4C&pg=PT801&lpg=PT801&dq=Thomas+Paine+had+passed+the+legendary+limit+of+life.+One+by+one+most+of+his+old+friends+and+acquaintances+had+deserted+him.+Maligned+on+every+side,+execrated,+shunned+and+abhorred+%E2%80%93+his+virtues+denounced+as+vices+%E2%80%93+his+services+forgotten+%E2%80%93+his+character+blackened,+he+preserved&source=bl&ots=u-TkRdSLyh&sig=zzAGLHnlKjthhGV41JEoY95TD60&hl=en&sa=X&ei=D0KPUuO8IZOA2AWb7YCIDg&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBw

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 11:47, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2018

hi i would like to edit his because i found a part wrong ОООо 2601:648:8600:CE00:3463:C913:B561:BC3B (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sakura Cartelet^Talk 23:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Revise this article and Common Sense

We should really read this article and rethink and maybe revise this article and the other. Maybe consider mentioning the disputed figures? We could mention Loughran as the main source to go off of. Only one person has so far disputed these figures in either of the talk pages, but Journal of the American Revolution has a much better analysis. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2018

The hyperlink "Rebels" (at the end of the first paragraph) should be changed to "Patriots". The wiki article it directs to is title "Patriots" and is the term that is historically accurate to their cause. Sam983 (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Rebels is also acceptable but I have changed it as patriot is the article title. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:04, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

English-born

Yes, he was. In fact, he emigrated to America at the age of 37 Pamour (talk) 14:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC).

And he never became an American citizen. Which means that he was British for all his life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.52 (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

English-born is correct, and so is American. He became a citizen of Pennsylvania upon migrating to America, and asserted that he was an American citizen until the end of his life. --CrapulousMass (talk) 01:39, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Paine was not an English-born American. He was English!

I know many in the US have a fondness and love for Thomas Paine. But he was English, he was born in England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.5.25 (talk) 18:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2018

The reference to Paine's father as a maker of maritime stays is nonsense. Thetford, the Paine family's home is about as far from the sea as it is possible to get in Norfolk. Paine's father was a maker of corsets, which were called 'stays' in that period.[Stay (ste) sb.1515 (3)pl. a pair of stays=a corset (The deceased died of apoplexy, produced by her stays being too tightly laced [1831] 'The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary'(Revised and edited CT Onions (1973) OUP. London)) T Ian Mayes (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I'm sorry, but citing geography and a dictionary definition is requesting that your interpretation be put into the article as fact, when in fact it's considered original research. Please cite a secondary source that addresses your requested change. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 19:11, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

At the time he was mocked in verse as "Tom the bodice-maker" https://diglib.amphilsoc.org/islandora/object/text:135980#page/1/mode/1up

See also caricatures here: https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2011/08/politics-staymaker-thomas-paine-1793.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.157.113.60 (talk) 16:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Letter to Washington Suggestion

The article has Paine writing a letter to Washington after Washington was dead--JimWae (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@JimWae: I looked. I don’t see it. Could you be specific about what you see? Thanks. Strebe (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Monroe returned to US in 1802 or 1803 - after GW died, article does not appear to take that into account timewise

In sec 4.1:

1."WHILE staying with Monroe, Paine planned to send Washington a letter of grievance on the president's birthday."

"while staying with Monroe" -- unless, did he stay with Monroe in Paris? If so, say so in article. But section comes after mention of 1802 return

2."Paine THEN sent a stinging letter to George Washington" - after saying Monroe stopped the letter? AND after already saying he had returned to US in 1802. --JimWae (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

From the text:

Upset that U.S. President George Washington, a friend since the Revolutionary War, did nothing during Paine's imprisonment in France, Paine believed Washington had betrayed him and conspired with Robespierre. While staying with Monroe, Paine planned to send Washington a letter of grievance on the president's birthday. Monroe stopped the letter from being sent, and after Paine's criticism of the Jay Treaty, which was supported by Washington, Monroe suggested that Paine live elsewhere.[90] ¶Paine then sent a stinging letter to George Washington, in which he described him as an incompetent commander and a vain and ungrateful person. Having received no response, Paine contacted his longtime publisher Benjamin Bache, the Jeffersonian democrat, to publish his Letter to George Washington of 1796…

This makes clear that all this happened in and before 1796, before Washington’s death. Where Paine and Monroe were at the time is not addressed in the article. The article does not intend to be in chronological order, so noting that this passage comes after mention of his return to the States in 1802 does not seem like a problem. The text preceding the 1802 mention implies that Paine was in the U.S in the 1795–1796 timeframe:

Paine was released in November 1794 largely because of the work of the new American Minister to France, James Monroe,[78] who successfully argued the case for Paine's American citizenship.[79] In July 1795, he was re-admitted into the Convention, as were other surviving Girondins. Paine was one of only three députés to oppose the adoption of the new 1795 constitution because it eliminated universal suffrage, which had been proclaimed by the Montagnard Constitution of 1793.[80]

Please make clarifications in the text if you have good sources. Strebe (talk) 06:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Literary essay in lieu of historical reference

A discussion of Paine's work from the aspect of literature isn't usable in citing a historical inference (or fact) TEDickey (talk) 22:04, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Please explain what you refer to. Strebe (talk) 22:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I looked up the reference, and see that it's a collection of literary essays. Some of those might cite a reliable source, but for the purpose it was used, it's inappropriate. Arguably one of the essays might point to relevant information, (in which case pointing to the page number and essay title/author is the way to go). TEDickey (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Which reference? What part of the article do you refer to? Strebe (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

this edit, which I reverted. On stuff like that (not obvious vandalism, but dubious), I sometimes add a talk-page note. TEDickey (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Religious context

@Annabellecrtrt: This edit’s wording confuses me, and where the material comes from in the references is also unclear. The note about The American Crisis appears to be WP:OR, since it refers to the original pamphlets rather than a historian’s explanation. It’s also unclear where in the thirteen pamphlets the material comes from. What does “involved in negative and positive ways” mean in “Paine was involved with religion in negative and positive ways”? These assertions are also similarly vague: “Paine's belief on a democratic level was related to by others. Acceptance of his religion fell on the same democratic principles that individuals faced.” What is “related to by others” and how was “related to” manifest? What is “acceptance of his religion”? What are “demographic principals that others faced” and how do they relate to acceptance of Paine’s religion? Strebe (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Edit war

Hello. I added the content that was disputed. Appreciate @Drmies for letting it stay until further notice. I want to rebut two things: for the quote on what the user called "generational wealth", it was in fact about, as I mentioned in edit history, the right of past generations to bind future ones. But, Hitchens made the point that it sounded like an excellent start to an argument against slavery, and that seems kind of obvious when you read it, but I knew this alone wouldn't justify including it. Therefore as you see, I added ANOTHER source, explicitly linking the quote, and only the quote, to Paine's anti-slavery stance. I believe, if anything, this should prove it fair to stand as is. If anyone doubts it, click the link on the second source, which takes you to the correct page in a Google ebook. I would still listen to counter-arguments though. As for Hitchens being a poor source in general, well, at least that vanishes in the case of the former bit, as I added a separate published source for that. As for the rest, I don't know if he reaches the standard all Wikipedians want, but all I can argue for is 1) it is a published book from a well-known author, and 2) it was already used other places on the page before I added this new content. Thoughts? Euor (talk) 00:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• It seems the IP editor is not interested in presenting their case here. Drmies (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)