Talk:366th Infantry Regiment (United States)

"African American" versus "Negro"

Someone keeps changing "African American" to "Negro" in this article. By consensus, the correct term in this context is African American (without a hyphen) ... this is not the same as Black people or Negro, both of which have their appropriate uses. This article is about segregation in the United States Army, and the link to "Negro" does not put an American spin on the discussion ... that's more of a world-view article.

To help with the contextual referencing, I have also linked "Black people" to the first use of "black", and "White American" to the first use of "white" ... that page has a link to White people, which again presents the globalized POV. —141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

You forgot to mention Colored, another popular "synonym" that pushes the wrong button for some readers, regardless of their race. --141.156.241.54 01:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

December 1, 2006 In the Context of Military Service nothing expresses the "debate" over designation of ethnicity based on the degree of melanin in one cell of the human body more clearly than the Sgt. who served under Major General Frederic Ellis Davison, " I was attached to the Brigade in late 1968, a buck sergeant commanding a 73-foot Infantry boat, and was astonished to be treated as a department head. I served under Lt. Col. A.W. Malone, commanding the Fifth Bn. 12th U.S. Infantry, 199th Light Infantry Brigade, a soldier and man whom I respect as highly as I do the General. American soldiers know when they are being well or poorly led, and I can affirm that we had complete confidence in our leadership. Rank meant little to us, and color meant nothing. Competence alone counted. Gen. Forbes, Gen. Davison, and Col. Malone never forgot that they had been entrusted with the lives of young Americans." Amerigasanmichele Amerigasanmichele 23:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Date they were deployed ... 1943 or 1944?

I believe that someone is attempting to perpetuate a typographical error ... the article should state,

"Beginning in November, 1943 the regiment deployed in Italy as part of the 5th Army,"

but someone keeps changing it to 1944.

The Liberation of Rome took place on June 4, 1944, and the Rome-Arno Campaign (for which they earned their second Cross of Lorraine) lasted from January, 1944 to September, 1944 ... the 366th could not have participated in either of these events if they were not deployed until November of 1944, so it must have been 1943! —141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It is crucial that this Wikipedia reference on the 366th Infantry Regiment be written and interpreted in the context of the time. I have directly used/quoted the references which I have obtained from several sources, all of which are directly from U. S. Army Archives, the most recent sent on October 18, 2006 from the "Department of the Army, U. S. Army Heritage and Education Center, Attn: Patron Services Division, 950 Soldiers Drive, Warlisle, Pa. 17013-5021 Web: www.carlisle.army.mil/usamhi. There are also direct references of the arrival and deployment of the various units from Camp Atterbury if you carefully search that site.

Tragically, the person who had previously "written" the section on 366th Infantry was writing a "revisionist history" or perspective. Contrary to the writer's perspective, the evolution of "colored (separate)" as is used is term used by Shelby L. Stanton in his book, Order of Battle, U. S. Army, World War II (Novato, California Preisdio Press, 1984), p. 252. Although the term "Negro" means black, I believe in Spanish, it is one of the disparaging elements of "segregation" or "segregationists" for after considerable research and discussion which has spanned several years, it is my impression that this biased concept goes back at least as far as Slavery, for even in the designation of the Slave population persons are designated as "Mulatto, female, age..." etc on a basis of one cell of pigmentation or so-called "appearance". It is one of the most provocative debates as persons who deem themselves to be "legitimate" descendants of Native American tribes, were designated by the Dawes Roll as "Indian" and more recently in WW II even families who were Puerto Rican e. g. were assigned on the basis of "appearance".

Although the term "Black" came into "common usage" in the 1960s during a time in which persons who were seeking a "common identity", "a common goal", in a previous era, the usuage of the term "Black" would have been considered a derogatory term. Thus, the term "Black" is actually a political term rather than giving an accurate description of Ethnicity. Perhaps it will give any further clarification if one understands that the Ethiopian/Eritrean people are really Hamitic people, i. e. first cousins to the Semitic people, the Jewish people and thus are not "considered" Black, though their skins may be a beautiful ebony.

James A. Sawicki's Infantry Regiments of the U. S. Army. (Dumries, Va., Wyvern, 1981) page 522 uses the term Negro as does the entire document of which I have included the most relevant portion relating to the 366th Infantry, Chapter XIX, Mountain and Plain, which is also an article which was created, studied and published directly under the auspices of the U. S. Army.

A further lack of comprehension on my part and apparently of others is why is a quotation allegedly over a Nazi Concentration camp relevant to the discussion of the 366th Infantry?????! (Please see below)

Although the term "African-American" is considered "acceptable" by some, it is truly inaccurate because the evolution of man is truly Homo Sapiens Sapiens, the genetic diversity is truly manifest in terms of color of skin in a miniscule number ?(5) of the human DNA or genome, thus as stated before it seems historically more correct to refer to this Unit in the terms that were in common usage in the period of time they saw such great sacrifice and hope by presenting the truth rather than a "revisionist version" that the sacrifices of the young men and women serving today will not be in vain.+

In spite of the divisions which existed and still exist in our society, it is crucial that the truth be told.

Although I have been ill and have not been able to carefully look at the contributions which were considered improperly formatted in regard to Howard Donovan Queen and my father, Lorenzo Raymond Sylvanus Nelson, M.D (or Major, M.C., Regimental Surgeon, 366th Infantry) I took hours and hours researching, further documenting this contribution or the changes made to the previous contribution of 366th Infantry, which was NOT ACCURATE! Thank you very much. I hope to be able to "master"PHP but at this time, I cannot revise the contributions made by me (or attempted to be made by me), but if I can get beyond this weekend, (I am studying or trying to study Programming Logic), I will. Thank you. User:Amerigasanmichele or America E. Nelson, M.S., M.D.,M.P.H. amerigasanmichele@yahoo.com

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.120.170.5 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Amerigasanmichele (a.k.a. User:216.120.170.5) talks about "revisionist history" or perspective in the main article, and the whole "African American" versus "Negro" thing (the Politically Correct term to use). They need to read Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Bias:

• Ethnic or racial bias, including racism, nationalism and regionalism.

They should particulary note Ethnicity#In_the_United_States, and everybody just {{Chill}} ... remember, Wikipedia is not about "Truth", it's about citing your sources, so stop debating WP:NPOV and start adding {{cite book}} and {{cite web}} tags with ISBN numbers instead of just copying whole pages of text from other websites, or already mentioned in other Wiki articles! </flame>

BTW, User:141.156.240.102's original question about "Date they were deployed ... 1943 or 1944?" still has not been addressed by anyone. —Dennette 21:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

New "Italy" section is unencyclopedic

Someone has added a Very Long section called "Italy" that reads like a copy&paste from an essay (and possibly violates Wikipedia:Copyrights) ... I have flagged it for cleanup, because it appears to violate Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and does not WP:CITE its sources. —141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The Contribution "Italy" was presented as documentation of important concepts which had been deleted or written as "revisionist history". It seems crucial in a concept as UNIVERSAL as WIKIPEDIA that TRUTH be preserved, no matter how "ugly". As expressed so succinctly by the former Senator Edward Brooke, who did have distinguished Service as an Officer of 366th Infantry, "The definitive assessment of the role of the 366th Infantry has not yet been written." I would hope out of respect for those no longer able to share the pain of battle that a search for and preservation of the kernel of TRUTH which gives validity, integrity, HONOR to their battle to "create a better world for their children and grandchildren" be respected. Formatting may be attained through a more dedicated pursuit of that mastery; however, it is important not to lose sight of that which is most important. User:Amerigasanmichele

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.120.170.5 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

This section is a copy&paste of material from http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/11-4/chapter19.htm, and I have removed it as a copyright violation ... you can't just copy whole pages of text from other sites into Wikipedia, even when it is Public Domain! People can click "THE EMPLOYMENT OF NEGRO TROOPS (Chapter XIX "Mountain And Plain") by Ulysses Lee" under External links to read the essay. — Dennette 06:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Arbeit macht frei

Am I the only person who sees the irony that a segregated US Army regiment wore the motto, "Labor conquors all things," while for millions of victims of Nazi genocide (for whose freedom the 366th was fighting), "Work brings freedom" was the last words they saw while entering the death camps? I mean, they are very similar in their optimistic outlook on life. —141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 00:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

My father served in Italy with Lt. Fox and Senator Brooke, and I grew up surrounded by 366th memorabilia, so Labor conquors all things was impressed upopn me from an early age. I still remember how surprised I was as a child when I learned about Auschwitz concentration camp in school and first heard about the signs that said Work makes one free, because the mottos seemed so similar to my young mind. Thanks for reminding me after all these decades. —Dennette 19:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

This looks like it violates No Original Research (or at least tests the limits of trivia) so I moved it here.

In one of history's ironies, the slogan, "Arbeit macht frei" (a German phrase meaning "work brings freedom") was placed at the entrances to a number of Nazi concentration camps.

An interesting observation, but unencyclopedic. —72.75.93.131 (talk · contribs) 23:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I AGREE!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amerigasanmichele (talk • contribs) 18:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Soldierofchicago (talk)soldierofchicago-I remember listening to a Christian talk station back in the 1990s and the guest on the show was a son of German immigrants. He mentioned a phrase "Arbeit macht laben suss"- "Work makes life sweet". I recall him regaling on his strict yet loving German father who obviously loved work. Connection? —Preceding comment was added at 19:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

366th veterans - external reference pages

There are pages for some of the veterans of the 366th Infantry Regiment on the site www.366th.org and on other websites. While they may not meet WP:BIO standards for inclusion on the Main page, external links for memorials, etc., may be included on Discussion/Talk pages.

• Ferguson, Alonzo G. — last Commanding Officer
• Fox, John R. — Medal of Honor recipient
• Hamilton, West A. — Regimental XO, retired as a Brigadier General
• Hargrove, Hondon B. — author, Buffalo Soldiers in World War II
• Jones, James W. — designed Regimental Shield and Crest
• Nelson, Lorenzo Raymond Sylvanus — Regimental Surgeon

If you want to include a link to a personal website for a 366th veteran, then please add them to this section, not the main article. —Dennette 17:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Backup "Notable veterans"

These individuals do not satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people), but in the spirit of the above posting by Dennette, I have moved them here to the Talk page rather than just delete them. When they have Wikipedia articles to which they can be linked, then they can be moved back to "Notable veterans" on the main page. --72.75.113.69 20:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Notable veterans

• Alston Waters Burleigh - Choirmaster, St. Luke's Episcopal Church, Washington, DC; son of Harry Thacker Burleigh.

• Frederick Ellis Davison - Retired in 1992 as a Major General after serving as Commanding General (CG) of the Military District of Washington. He became the first African American combat Brigade commander when he assumed command of the U.S. 199th Light Infantry Brigade in the midst of battle during the 1968 Tet Offensive.

• Charles Fisher - Regimental Chaplain.

• John Letts -

• Charles A. Pratt -

ISBNs in citations

I have also zapped some totally inappropriate "External links" and "References". And please, people, have a look at the {{cite book}} template before you add references to books ... if it doesn't have an ISBN number, then it will probably get zapped. You have been warned! --72.75.113.69 20:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

NOTE BENE: THIS IS INCORRECT INFORMATION. HAVING GAINED SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON A KEY BOOK WHOSE PUBLICATION WAS 1984, the REFERNCE LIBRARIAN, KALAMAZOO PUBLIC LIBRARY found NO ISBN # and stated that 1984 was before the International S.....Book Number was established. Please do not delete information without taking time to access and read the key documents presented as Refernces. Thank you very much. - Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 22:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Then why do these have International Standard Book Numbers?

• James A. Sawicki (1981). Infantry Regiments of the U.S. Army. Wyvern. p. 522. ISBN 0-96024-043-8.
• Shelby L. Stanton (1984). Order of Battle, U. S. Army, World War II. California Presidio Press. p. 252. ISBN 0-88365-775-9.

According to Wikipedia, "The ISBN system was created in the United Kingdom in 1966 ... adopted as international standard ISO 2108 in 1970." Please verify facts before claiming "THIS IS INCORRECT INFORMATION", even if it's from "REFERNCE LIBRARIAN, KALAMAZOO PUBLIC LIBRARY."

Human memories are faulty -- that's why mankind created recordable media ("It says here on the Bearskin of My Father's Father that ...")

WikiText recognizes ISBNs and generates links for beau coup resources to either borrow or buy a copy ... for Hargrove's book, ISBN 0-89950-116-8 generates Special:Booksources&isbn=0899501168#Booksellers, from which you click Find this book on Amazon.com where they currently offer "7 used & new available from $4.90" ... or you can find a copy in a local library by country. (There are even bots that go around reading pages and reformatting ISBN numbers to be ISO 2108 compliant.) This also cuts down on the number of self-published books without ISBNs being used as citations ... it's more "reliable" if it has an ISBN. —72.75.93.131 (talk · contribs) 23:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification. My teacher, Mr. Marty Adams, when rewriting or submiting the information about Major General Davison agreed with you that his command of Washington was most significant. I am not sure why it was deleted. However, I am refining my answer to the IBSN question which the Librarian answered my question in regard to a REFERENCE which I requested in detail including the ISBN number which she said was not a part of a book published in 1984. As this reference is not in regard to a 366th Infantry Regiment question, I will refrain from further discussion. My concern was the Warning that any reference which did not have an IBSN number would be deleted; thus, I wished to ask that before a reference is deleted the party should have the courteous integrity/intellect to access and carefully review the document and reference. Thank you very much. : Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 04:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:U.S. 366th Infantry Regiment#Notable veterans (the section above this one) for the latest Davison bio ... having an ISBN makes it Much Easier for someone "to access and carefully review the document and reference" because they can just click the link to find the book ... and please learn the proper etiquette for replies:

1. They go below the text to which you are making a reply.
2. They should be indented. (Use the ":" character as the first on the line.)
3. You only put your name once, at the end, and DO NOT begin a comment with a date and time that you enter by hand.
4. Computers can insert time/date automatically using the system clock, not your local time zone ... use five tildes ( ~~~~~ ) at the end of your post, after your signature.

Frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of correcting and moving your comments just so that people can read them in the proper order. (And this conversation about ISBNs should propbably move to your Talk page, as this one has already become Much Longer than the article.) 72.75.93.131 06:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hyperlink to Frederick Ellis Davison

December 1, 2006 I would deeply appreciate clarification in regard to the deletion of the significant contribution of (?) Crowder of Major General Frederic Ellis Davison. One may not say that it was deleted because of formatting because Mr. Marty Adams, my teacher, a person very skilled in many "computer languages", formatting and appropriate programming logic is the person who reviewed and installed this contribution. He is a veteran of 19 years military service and felt that the contribution should have been under "Notable Veterans". The significance of the 366th Infantry Regiment was that these men and Officers were VERY well educated, very talented, professionally well trained and versed in many diverse fields from the Commanding Officers to Private. This has been presented to me as an important distinction between the 366th Infantry Regiment and the 92nd Division, some of whom describe(d) themselves as "farm boys". It is a topic which is dealt with in considerable detail by Mr. Truman K. Gibson re: 92nd Division stimulating considerable controversy at the time, but after 2003 revisted by him after a sigificant meeting with an Italian friend. : Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 08:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The comment said, "External links - rm Davison -- not mentioned in article, no mention of 366th on external link website -- see :Talk:U.S._366th_Infantry_Regiment#Notable_veterans"

1. Frederic Davison's name is not mentioned in the 366th Infantry Regiment artcle
2. The 366th Infantry Regiment is not mentioned on http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/fdavison.htm
3. There is absolutely no apparent connection between the subject of the article and the subject of the external link.
4. The casual reader would click that link and immediately think, "Why am I reading about this person? What do they have to do with the article I was just reading?"

The link was repaired and preserved as [2] in his description in the Notable veterans section on this page because it is a reliable source for the assertion that he was "a decorated veteran of two wars." The proper formatting for a citation is ...

{{cite web 
 | url = http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/fdavison.htm
 | accessdate = 2006-12-01
 | title = '''Frederic Ellis Davison''' - Major General, United States Army
 | publisher = Arlington National Cemetery
 }}

which looks like this ...

"Frederic Ellis Davison - Major General, United States Army". Arlington National Cemetery. Retrieved 2006-12-01.

Have your teacher, Mr. Marty Adams, read {{cite web}} for how to use this WikiTemplate when adding external links.

Now, if you can find a reliable source for "he became the first African American combat Brigade commander", then he might be notable enough to go back on the main article page ... until then, it's just an unsubstantiated assertion.

He was not the first African American Major General. Having been a Division commander is not very notable by itself (there are hundreds who do not have Wikipedia articles). And consider that there are three and four star generals who don't rate articles. But, if you can establish enough notability (e.g., being the "first African American" at something), then his name can return to the main article, and the link will appear in References instead of External links ... for now, build up his "props" here on the Talk page. —72.75.93.131 (talk · contribs) 11:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

December 1, 2006 9: 55 A. M.

I believe that this "comment" or Warning is misplaced/misdirected for I have not introduced any EDIT in regard to the information therein. Please note also that I did not introduce the information in regard to Major General Frederic Ellis Davison in regard to BRIGADE  ?; however, contrary to your analysis which I appreciate VERY MUCH, although the 366th Infantry Regiment in not mentioned in the initial ARLINGTON CEMETERY hyperlink, a very direct reference to the importance of this service in made in the last line of the first page. Although there is an informal description of members of the 366th Infantry, fellow officers and men, now aged who attended his funeral, I found an even more direct and accurate description I will attempt to install as a external link as you have indicated. THANK YOU VERY MUCH -Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 15:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Note bene: Although using the format that you suggested for external link, it was not effectively transmitted. I would deeply appreciate your careful assessment and direction. Thank you very much. -Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 15:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Search for "366th" on the Arlington Cemetery page and you get bupkiss ... it is not mentioned. I have removed your newly added link to an unsigned, undated essay on a website dedicated to the subject of the article ... the Notable veterans section on the 366th Talk page will show you the correct way to do it (edit the section to see how the magic works.)

As for your newly added "citation" -- http://www.366th.org/davison/gendavis.htm -- that does not qualify as a Reliable Source ... it's a website some guy set up as a memorial for his father's wartime companions ... find the SOURCE from which that page was created (e.g., author's name, publication name, issue and page number), and if it can be verified, then it can be used on the Main page ... for now, it can only be used as a placeholder on the Talk page, because the following quote from the website must be considered original research:

In July of 1968, the 199th Light Infantry Brigade was involved in a series of very nasty firefights in the Rach Vong area of South Vietnam, in one of which the Brigade commander was wounded. Brigade command passed to the deputy commander, Col. Frederic E. Davison, who thereby became the first black combat Brigade commander.

That statement may very well be true, but just because some anonymous author put it on a website does not make it a valid citation by Wikipedia standards (for a number of reasons already mentioned, including the fact that any personal website or page could evaporate next week), and so far, that is his only claim of satisfying WP:BIO, i.e., that he was a "first" at something (see: List of African American firsts) ... "decorated veteran" doesn't carry as much weight as "highly decorated veteran," but that claim cannot be made in his case.

Personally, I think that "Commanding General (CG) of the Military District of Washington" (his last post) is more impressive than "commanded the 8th Infantry Division in Germany" (although he is redlinked in the 8th Infantry article under After World War II, among the list of 32 commanders between 1950 and 1992), but I don't think that either of those statements are notable enough to be included in a one sentence description of why Davison is notable ... it has to be as simple and effective as the ones for Fox and Brooke, just "Who, What, and When" ... if you want "Why, Where, and How," then follow the link for "Who" and read the article ... this article is not the place to list his accomplishments ... that's what articles about a subject are for. (And yes, I know I ended that with a preposition!)

As for the format, I transmitted it as effectively as I could, which is the same way that it was transmitted to me ... YOU MUST NOT HAVE A SPACE CHARACTER AS THE FIRST CHARACTER ON THE LINE!! (BTW, you should really fix your User page ... that's why it is unreadable. —72.75.93.131 (talk · contribs) 21:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

December 12, 2006

I am requesting a review of "clean-up" of Amerigasanmichele User page which is a biography of Lorenzo Raymond Sylvanus Nelson, M.D. I conformed to the criteria of having reference to articles which already exist. The Biography has key information. I noticed for example when I tried to access "Jeanne Spurlock, M.D." that it does not have a key biographical article, yet she has a full page representing her accomplishments through Google Search. Perhaps it is important to have the editors clarify and perhaps even consider redefining what/who are considered "Notable Alumni","Notable Veterans", "Notable persons". Thank you for your help. -Amerigasanmichele (talk · contribs) 12:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This request should be on your User Talk page, not here. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (people). —Dennette 18:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Recent wikification of dates in article

Hello, Colonies Chris (talk · contribs) ... Regarding your recent edits to this article, your wikification of dates is causing a problem for users with non-default Date and Time settings in My Preferences ... for example, I have Date Format set to the last option, ISO format (2001-01-15T16:12:34) ... set yours like that, and then view the page, noting the section World War I ...

• St. Die Sector (Lorraine), August 23-1918-09-20
• Meuse-Argonne Sector, September 26-1918-10-05

Yeah, that's how it displays if you don't use the default date format; you get a mixture of two different formats when reading or printing the page!! Just a head-up in case you were not aware of the disruption you are creating, well-intended as it may have been ... you might want to try experimenting with the different preference settings for dates and see how your changes have affected the readability of other articles ... remember, "Just because you can do something does not always mean that you should do it." --72.75.84.93 23:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a difficulty with the design of the wiki formatting for partial dates. There is no perfect solution. If you leave the dates unwikified, then of course you don't get the date formatting you want. If you wikify them, some users will get this kind of odd result. The only perfect solution is to spell out both dates in full

23 August 1918-20 September 1918

but some people consider this a bit verbose and unnatural.

Another option is not to link the year - then the month/day formatting changes according to user preferences but the year stays at the end - again, rather unsatisfactory. for the time being, I'll change these ones to use the full date format, unless there's a consensus for some other method.Colonies Chris 23:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 366th Infantry Regiment (United States). 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/20060901154719/http://nupress.northwestern.edu/title.cfm?ISBN=0-8101-2292-8 to http://www.nupress.northwestern.edu/title.cfm?ISBN=0-8101-2292-8
• Added archive https://archive.is/20100205232518/http://www.forloveofliberty.net/stories/366th-infantry-regiment/90 to http://www.forloveofliberty.net/stories/366th-infantry-regiment/90

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) 22:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Page look-over

I'm going to work on addressing the tagged issues on this page--connecting sources/adding inlines, as well as archiving sources and adding some new ones. I will work in my sandbox so please leave any questions and suggestions here. Thanks. Light&highbeautyforever (talk) 20:19, 23 February 2023 (UTC)