Talk:Lloyd L. Gaines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleLloyd L. Gaines has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
February 28, 2005Articles for deletionNo consensus
November 8, 2019Peer reviewReviewed
December 1, 2019Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 19, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Thurgood Marshall said of Lloyd L. Gaines: "I have never lost the pain of having so many people spend so much time and money on him, just to have him disappear" 73 years ago today?
Current status: Good article

2004 commentary[edit]

This has the makings of an extremely good article. It needs serious cleanup, and it has editorializing. I'm also going to look into whether there's a possible copyvio going on here. Hydriotaphia 08:45, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

After doing some googling, I haven't been able to find any copyvio. Looks like this is an original. Hydriotaphia 08:49, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

from Vfd[edit]

On 17 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. There was no consensus. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lloyd L. Gaines for a record of the discussion.

from John[edit]

The accuracy of information needs to be checked. The article indicates that Lloyd Gaines disappeared on March 19, 1939. I think it was later than that.

The Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in December, 1938, and remanded the case to the Supreme Court of Missouri. On August 1, 1939, the Supreme Court of Missouri ordered a hearing to be held, so that it could be determined whether the newly-created law school at Lincoln University (for blacks) was equal to the law school at the University of Missouri (for whites). State ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 344 Mo. 1238, 131 S.W.2d 217 (1939).

If Gaines had disappeared 6 months previously, it seems unlikely that the court would have proceeded with the case. I do not recall the citation at this point, but I recall reading that the hearing was set for October, 1939, and that Gaines disappeared a few weeks prior to that.

According to this this source, the NAACP wasn't keeping very close tabs on Gaines's whereabouts and only found out in September 1939, six months after his APhiA buddies said they'd last seen him, when they went back to get him prepped for the hearing. You have to remember that was a much less wired society back then and information, even with the telegraph, telephone and radio, could still not travel fast. Disappearances didn't make big news then unless it was, say, someone big like Judge Crater. There was little the police could do to trace someone, and often (just as still happens sometimes now; see Casey Anthony) people weren't reported missing until long after they had last been seen ... Crater's absence wasn't reported to the police for a while, and later that year Barbara Newhall Follett's disappearance wasn't reported to the police for two weeks and not considered a missing-persons case for four months. Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The proposed topic is appropriate, but it needs better citations.


is it safe to say that he was probably murdered by someone? (talk) 16:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

His surviving relatives say that his family probably believed as much—they were from rural Mississippi and knew all too well how the Klan worked and would have known not to say anything at the time. But the writer of the above-cited article talks to two people who say that Lorenzo Greene had talked to him on a visit to Mexico in the late 1940s. The article does establish that Gaines was growing weary of his role and may have wanted to walk away from it; it advances the theory that some segregationist(s) paid him a lot of money to just get out of the country and disappear. Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I added his approx age at disappearance. It is commonly (if perhaps inaccurately) believed that he was abducted and murdered by racists, but no clues (and no Klan-type bragging) ever materialized, and Chicago seems (now) an unlikely place for Klan activity. By now, of course, anyone with first-hand knowledge is gone. Sussmanbern (talk) 02:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

From Slidhome[edit]

It is unclear from the article which law school has Mr. Gaines' portrait. It is not the school created by the Missouri General Assembly, the Lincoln University School of Law, as a result of the Supreme Court decision because that school ceased to exist in 1955. The article refers to "the law school" several times and that needs clarification. Having read several sources about Mr. Gaines, I think it is safe to say the portrait hangs in the University of Missouri School of Law, -- the oldest one. Slidhome (talk) 17:51, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It is and that's what was intended ... I was unsure if Lincoln still had a law school since the sources established that the one started in 1939 was closed during the war for lack of students, so I didn't distinguish there, and I thought the antecedent was clear. Apparently not. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lloyd L. Gaines. 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:

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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 23:20, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lloyd L. Gaines/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Fiamh (talk · contribs) 02:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

  • Houston was ill with the tuberculosis that would end his life a decade later. He resigned from the NAACP to return to private practice; Thurgood Marshall took over for him. In the first five years after the war, the NAACP found more plaintiffs and challenged segregationist policies in public graduate schools with cases such as You can cite the cases for their existence, but this needs a secondary source.
  • Katz, Hélèna (2010). James, 107–13. Whites, LeeAnn (2004). Can we get narrower page ranges please? One or two pages is best.
How about using {{rp}} after the cite to indicate which page in the range? Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
That's fine.
 Done Daniel Case (talk) 17:30, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
  • No need for access date on print publications. Even if you accessed via Google Books or similar, the page ranges relate to the edition which is already provided by the ISBN.
I would disagree. Google has been known to change which pages of a book it allows a viewer access to, or sometimes even end preview mode on a book entirely. Providing an access date indicates to the reader that these pages were available for public viewing when the article was written.

And as for the ISBN, sometimes it refers to the online version, not the print one. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, it probably isn't required for GA criteria anyway.
  • ($4,000 in modern dollars) These are helpful, but please state the year, i.e. 2019. Helps the article not go out of date.
I have been told in the past that when you're not using a specific year as the target date (and {{Inflation}} can handle that omission quite easily) to just say "modern", since without a specific year as the target date for the adjustment it will automatically stay with the current year's value as the template is adjusted to keep up. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
In that case, I would suggest using "current" instead. "Modern" history goes back to the 17th century.
 Done Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
  • The NAACP attorneys were encouraged Again, you're going to need a source for this. The court case isn't going to support this info.
 Done Root and Branch does, telling us "the special counsel was optimistic about victory" in Gaines' case and discussing the limitations of Murray immediately afterwards (If you want me to put this quote in an endnote so the reader can see where we're getting this from, I will). Daniel Case (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
  • someone else.[6] ... might have been.[6] combine refs for readability.
 Done Probably a mistake made during a copy edit. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
  • After working as a clerk for the Works Progress Administration... what is your source for this paragraph?
 Done Same as the source for the graf afterwards; someone else thoughtfully split up the graf and apparently forgot to put the source back in for the newly created graf. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Houston and Redmond successfully petitioned and Gaines had begun his letter suggest combining each of these paragraphs with the next paragraph per WP:PARAGRAPH.
Well, they describe discrete events that are separated in time; I feel that since the second of the two grafs has a long blockquote it's easier on the reader for the first three sentences to be a separate graf. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
  • In his last letter to his mother, dated March 3 what is the source for this?
The Riverfront Times article that's cited at the end of the graf. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
That's not at all clear right now. You should add another citation either after the colon or at the end of the blockquote.
 Done Daniel Case (talk) 02:48, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Ebony section—have you tried to get a copy of the original article on WP:RX? It would be great to cite this to the original source.
I have been able to look at it, in a library (I think) but it doesn't say anything that isn't repeated in the Riverfront Times story, so I didn't find any reason to cite it as a source. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
  • By that time Gaines had received honors (some were posthumous) This sentence just sounds really awkward.
Fixed Daniel Case (talk) 00:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Legacy and honors section needs more references.
 Done I also took out one sentence that really didn't turn out to be true or at least supported by the sources I used. Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Where you're citing a court case for anything other than the case's existence, cite the particular page where the relevant information is found; for example, the citation to Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (a, b, and c).
 Done Daniel Case (talk) 05:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Not related to GA criteria:

  • I have access to a PDF copy of the 2016 book via my university library. If you would like chapters of the book for further improvement in the article, please let me know. That might help with (over-)reliance on the Riverfront Times source.
Indeed. I just looked at it on Google Books. It had not been written, much less published, when I first wrote and researched this seven years ago. As the authors say in the introduction, a book devoted to Gaines and his case was long overdue.

I shall avail myself of this, although I think I could find a copy in the two excellent university libraries I have access to. It would help the article a lot. Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

  • Two media outlets looked into the case, a half-century apart needs to be cited inline if you plan to take this to DYK or FAC.
It's already been to DYK, actually, shortly after I wrote it (see the top of the page). Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 Done all the same. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 23 November 2019 (UTC)