Jump to content

Talk:Roanoke Colony: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
ARCHIVING: Older than 2 years
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: Colonial history.
 
(147 intermediate revisions by 74 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{American English}}
{{Article history
|action1=PR|action1date=11 December 2019|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Roanoke Colony/archive1|action1result=not reviewed
|otd1date=2004-08-18|otd1oldid=5297245|otd2date=2007-08-18|otd2oldid=152128382|otd3date=2008-08-18|otd3oldid=232328297|otd4date=2011-08-18|otd4oldid=445452937|otd5date=2015-08-18|otd5oldid=676480319|otd6date=2017-08-18|otd6oldid=796072061|otd7date=2020-08-18|otd7oldid=973633252|otd8date=2023-08-18|otd8oldid=1170698247
}}
{{afd-merged-from|Lost Colony DNA Project|Lost Colony DNA Project|11:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)}}
{{afd-merged-from|Lost Colony DNA Project|Lost Colony DNA Project|11:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=mid|NC=Yes|NC-importance=High}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=mid |NC=Yes |NC-importance=High|UShistory=yes|UShistory-importance=high}}
{{WikiProject England|class=B|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject England|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Former countries|class=C}}
{{WikiProject Former countries}}
}}
}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2004-08-18|oldid1=5297245|date2=2007-08-18|oldid2=152128382|date3=2008-08-18|oldid3=232328297|date4=2011-08-18|oldid4=445452937}}

== Recent news articles ==
The following New York Times article may be of interest to editors updating this article:

:{{cite news|last=Emery|first=Theo|title=Map’s Hidden Marks Illuminate and Deepen Mystery of Lost Colony|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/us/map-markings-offer-clues-to-lost-colony.html|accessdate=May 3, 2012|newspaper=New York Times|date=May 3, 2012}}
[[User:TJRC|TJRC]] ([[User talk:TJRC|talk]]) 01:18, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Also a similar [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9244947/Ancient-map-gives-clue-to-fate-of-Lost-Colony.html article in the Telegraph] which may be illuminating. [[User:EdwardLane|EdwardLane]] ([[User talk:EdwardLane|talk]]) 09:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

== Cannibalism? ==
I don't know if cannibalism is a likely theory, considering legends of the wendigo and the strict taboos on it, the idea that a large group would do something like that seems unlikely. [[User:Kman5552|Kman5552]] ([[User talk:Kman5552|talk]]) 19:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I will delete the reference to cannibalism unless someone has a good reason not to. The citation is "Stager, Lawrence 'An Investigation into the Roanoke Colony' in the Harvard Alumni Magazine retrieved 8/17/09," but a search for "Stager" at harvardmagazine.com results in only two (unrelated) hits. Stager is Dorot Professor of the Archaeology of Israel in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Harvard University and Director of the Harvard Semitic Museum, so claims about Native American cannibals would seem outside his bailiwick in any case. Other searches only point back to this article. It's not my area of expertise, so I'll wait for a response here first. Just saying the cite can't be verified. [[User:Giordanob|Giordanob]] ([[User talk:Giordanob|talk]]) 04:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)Giordanob (Additional note: even if the cite were to be verified, I note that the Harvard Alumni Magazine is not an academic publication. [[User:Giordanob|Giordanob]] ([[User talk:Giordanob|talk]]) 05:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)giordanob)

Seeing no objections, I deleted this reference. [[User:Giordanob|Giordanob]] ([[User talk:Giordanob|talk]]) 05:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)giordanob

== wild three headed dogs? ==
The last line of the 2nd paragraph of "'''White returns to England'''" Soon a pack of wild three headed dogs appeared, and everyone fled for their ships. The citation says nothing about it, and three headed dogs are abnormal. [[User:Nathan czh|Nathan czh]] ([[User talk:Nathan czh|talk]]) 03:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:That was just a nonconstructive edit by an IP. Completely uncited. Fixed now. -- [[User:JoannaSerah|JoannaSerah]] ([[User talk:JoannaSerah|talk]]) 04:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

== Current Research ==
Anyone who is at all interested in The Roanoke Colony should go here : http://lost-colony.com
I cannot believe no one has caught this..the research being done by East Carolina University with regards to this is the only current relevant scientific information regarding the colony..they have been working on this project for many years now and I don`t understand why it hasn`t made its way into the main article.
--[[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 02:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
:The link has been in the [[Roanoke Colony#External links|External links]] section for a very long time. <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">—'''[[User:Howcheng|<span style="color:#33C;">howcheng</span>]]''' <small>{[[User talk:Howcheng|chat]]}</small></span> 03:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
That may be true but apparently no one has looked at it..none of the information is in the article[[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 04:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
:That sounds like an opportunity for you. Happy editing! <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">—'''[[User:Howcheng|<span style="color:#33C;">howcheng</span>]]''' <small>{[[User talk:Howcheng|chat]]}</small></span> 02:27, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

anyway the evidence is pretty much out there..apparently they moved inland about 50 miles which is what they said they were going to do and established a settlement there..I will do an edit but im not an historian and wish someone more qualified would do it..there is also a group of people on Hatteras doing research i think its the Croaton Archelogical Society and they`ve found some cool stuff but they haven't really published anything as far as I know and they are just jumping to the conclusion that all the colonist moved to Hatteras..people have been saying that for years with no real evidence although they are finding a lot of mixed Indian/English artifacts down there now..anyway ill work on an edit unless someone comes up with something--[[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 03:54, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

OK..I`ve been bold...I have edited the article to include the Beechland Hypothesis..I realize this is a very incomplete edit however I am asking the powers that be not to revert it..if you look at the source material it has been very thoroughly researched and this hypothesis is not only the only modern attempt to finally solve the riddle of the so called " Lost Colony " but it is by far the most researched and academic..again I am not an historian however with regard to this subject I know what I`m talking about...local people in the area have maintained for centuries that they are the decedents of Native Americans and the original settlers from the old world..not just the Roanoke colonist but whoever washed up on the Outer Banks.

I will attempt to finish editing this article and make it more complete..I understand that what I`ve written so far has not really been properly referenced although the information is there..someone more knowledgeable than myself should be doing this with regard to referencing and quality of writing..I am having a lot of trouble understanding how to reference these articles as I am not particularly computer literate however as I`ve already stated the information that is available regarding this subject is extensive and should be included in the article.

The inclusion in the article regarding many of the previous attempts to explain the supposed disappearance of the colony should be eliminated..most of these beliefs were never more than crackpot ideas that no one ever took seriously..there was a writer back in the 1950`s who wrote a pamphlet stating that the colony was on Cedar Island which no one believed but it made a lot more sense then saying they reverted to cannibalism or tried to sail back to Europe without a ship..these sections should be taken out of the article and I intend to do so within a reasonable amount of time if there are no objections. [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 18:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
:I will add the footnotes where you asked for them..they are in the articles on the lost colony website [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 04:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
:I improved the footnotes..I will continue to do so as long as my edits are not deleted..I am not an historian but I will do my best [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 19:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

== Beechland ==
The edits leave all of the work to the reader. The work cited is a master's thesis, which (courtesy of the internet) can be argued to have been published (see [http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/handle/1840.16/6486?mode=full website]). However (see [http://art.unc.edu/art-history/graduate-programs/ma-degree-requirements/ requirements]) master's theses are not in general peer-reviewed (a better source is needed) [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 00:04, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The work is rarely mentioned, for instance [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Beechland+and+the+Lost+Colony%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a this] gives 10 hits. One is a [http://theamericanchronicle.blogspot.com/2013/01/whither-roanoke-colony.html blog]. The others are essentially the publication(sic) information. [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 00:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The section refers to "extensive research" and "research group". I see only one author listed, and only one work (the comment about syphilis appears to be in context something used by the source) [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 08:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I don`t really understand what most of what you`ve said means..again I am not a scholar..I have lived in the area for years and read everything I could on the subject..the website [ http://lost-colony.com ] is a collection of papers by different people not a single thesis..it seems to me that the information is accurate and should be include in the article and that at least some of the myths regarding the Roanoke Colony should be deleted..again I am not an historian...someone that knows what they are doing should do this not me..also the article is turning into a series of non-chronological edits that should be consolidated in my opinion. [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 19:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

:: I clarified a few of my references. [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 04:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

This section seems to be to be largely a mixture of original research and fringe theories. The section is full of weasel words trying to make it sound like these theories are more widely accepted, "extensive research", "argued by the research group", "moreover it has been argued". All meaningless unquantifiable terms often used to try buttress a fringe theory. This section has been assembled by one editor, using sources that are collected on one fringe website [http://www.lost-colony.com/]. There is as far I can find no information on who exactly this "The Lost Colony Center for Science and Research" is. Their biggest claim to anything seems to be that they have a 700 member mailing list and have purchased some buildings. I think this fringe theory should be removed from the article until someone can demonstrate a more wide spread acceptance by legitimate peer reviewed accredited researchers. [[Special:Contributions/71.52.213.43|71.52.213.43]] ([[User talk:71.52.213.43|talk]]) 09:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Since there has been no effort by the person making these edits to deal with sourcing this beyond a single unrelaible source, I have been bold and removed the section in question. [[Special:Contributions/71.52.209.48|71.52.209.48]] ([[User talk:71.52.209.48|talk]]) 13:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


== Citation style ==
OK..you removed my little addition which was all based on academic research via East Carolina University..what original reseach? It was all just a very short paraphrase of other peoples referenced research..nothing in it had anything to do with me..you leave in the Dare Stone story..as well as all the meaningless conjecture that has has accumulated over the years some of which are not referenced at all..I knew someone would....people have been saying they went to Hatteras for years to promote tourism..I`ve heard all the ghost stories..all the crackpot theories since I was a kid..I suppose you know all about the Cedar Island theory too right? Did you read any of the source material? It was all referenced by educated professionals..you haven`t even signed your post..I never claimed to be a historian or even a writer for that matter but this is crap..the research out of ECU is the only scientific enquiry into the colonies fate using modern historical analysis such as GPS DNA testing etc..and yet none of it is included in the article..not to mention that they did what someone should have done years ago which is trace the land deeds and god forbid interview the people who live there and claim to be their descendants...if this is a fringe group why is their website listed as an external source? If you bothered to read any of the information on it yourself you would probably get it through your head that it`s pretty obvious they ended up on the Alligator peninsula eventually Gum Neck and points west..on the other hand maybe it`s better they just stay lost. [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 07:47, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


I propose switching the citation style to Sfn notes, which allow for citing different pages of the same work in separate citations, eliminating the need for the 'rp' template. I think the rp template, especially combined with the AMA style, makes the article hard to read, with unusual small parenthetical numbers between the regular footnotes and prose. [[User:UpdateNerd|UpdateNerd]] ([[User talk:UpdateNerd|talk]]) 11:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
: and someone..probably whoever removed my edit removed the source material [ http://lost-colony.com ] [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 04:15, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


== Confusing summary ==
::Your long rant has nothing to with the issues presented by two separate editors to the fact that this is all fringe science that has not be covered in any reliable sources. While there are countless other fringe theories those all have been covered by numerous reliable sources. And yes I removed the link to the fringe site Lost-Colony. Please read [[WP:OR]], [[WP:Fringe]], [[WP:V]], and [[WP:RS]] and base your arguments on policy not on how you personally feel. [[Special:Contributions/71.52.211.241|71.52.211.241]] ([[User talk:71.52.211.241|talk]]) 19:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm reading the summary in the intro paragraphs without having read the rest of the article, and I find it quite confusing. It's filled with bad forms like "while awaiting... Lane abandoned"; it omits crucial information (I assume ''everybody'' abandoned the colony in 1586, not just Lane, otherwise it's unclear why they had to build a whole new settlement later); and it's vague about roles and cause-effect relationships. For instance, the sentence "During a stop to check on Grenville's men, flagship pilot Simon Fernandes forced White and his colonists to remain on Roanoke." Why was Fernandes checking on Greenville's men, who were only mentioned in relation to the previous settlement? What Greenville's men were doing at that point? How did Fernandes force White and his colonists to remain on Roanoke? Does that mean that the ''circumstances'' forced them (in what way, though?), or that Fernandes gave them an explicit order? This whole concept is immediately contradicted by the following sentence anyway, which describes White going back to England with Fernandes. And what authority did Fernandes have? He's only described as "a flagship pilot", which is an obscure designation if not expanded upon (and it's not even hyperlinked). [[User:Kumagoro-42|Kumagoro-42]] ([[User talk:Kumagoro-42|talk]]) 05:27, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


::generally agree: I don't see any substantive followup to my comments on the Beechland edits. [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 19:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
:I tried reading the rest of the article, but gave up. Like the lead, it is a confusing mess. It seems to be simultaneously excessively detailed while also lacking critical context. [[User:CAVincent|CAVincent]] ([[User talk:CAVincent|talk]]) 08:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


== Navbox ==
::A more specific example this study and sources pretty much define point by point what is not considered reliable scholarship see [[Wikipedia:RS#Scholarship]]. It's an isolated study, it has not been peer reviewed, no third parties have covered it, it's not cited by any other scholars. [[Special:Contributions/71.52.211.241|71.52.211.241]] ([[User talk:71.52.211.241|talk]]) 23:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


Hello! I've created a navbox to group the various topics surrounding the Roanoke Colony:
:but you keep in that they may have gone to the Chesapeake Bay...they may have been lost at sea...they may have been captured by the Spanish...why is any of that even in the article? [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 00:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
* {{tl|Roanoke Colony}}
I'll leave it under construction for a week or so. Feel free to contribute! [[User:Steveprutz|StevePrutz]] ([[User talk:Steveprutz|talk]]) 14:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2024 ==
::Moving on until you at least acknowledge that you have read and understood the above criticisms of your sourcing for this section of the article. Not going to get in a giant roundabout debate with you. Address the issues as presented or move on [[Special:Contributions/71.52.211.196|71.52.211.196]] ([[User talk:71.52.211.196|talk]]) 03:46, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


Peaceful and Lovely ABig Garden full of normal…just normal…ok!
no I am not going to go away..or " move on "


== Huh? ==
I did not add the link to the lost-colony website..it was already in the article when I first read it..it was already there..the information in the various articles seemed accurate and researched..I did not understand why the link was listed but none of the information was in the Wikipedia article..that did not make sense to me as I said in this talk session..I also said I didn`t have a clue how to reference any of the information..the ECU team has never said that the colonist ended up at Beechland...neither did I...it is a theory...in my opinion probably true...I haven`t seen any more reliable information regarding what happened to these people..nevertheless it is strictly a hypothesis..if you read any of what they have written hopefully you would understand that the reason why they presented their findings in the way that they did was to allow the reader to form their own opinion and gather more information.


“The colonists may have possessed the resources to construct another seaworthy vessel, using local lumber and spare parts from the pinnace. '''Considering the ships were built by survivors of the 1609 Sea Venture shipwreck,''' it is at least possible that the Lost Colonists could produce a second ship that, with the pinnace, could transport most of their party.”
If you have some kind of information regarding these people`s fate why don`t you share it? What is it about this theory specifically that you object to besides you think the people who are studying it are a "fringe group" ? I understand rules are rules but half of what I`ve read on Wikipedia is poorly referenced or not referenced at all..in this article the bit about sailing back to England comes to mind..how in the world do you consider any of this original research on my part? isn`t there a rule that says you`re supposed to sign your post? [[User:Lonepilgrim007|Lonepilgrim007]] ([[User talk:Lonepilgrim007|talk]]) 00:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
:Another long rant, and still nothing based in policy. Last reply until you actually reply to the issues outlined above and base you reply firmly in Wikipedia policy. [[Special:Contributions/67.8.42.4|67.8.42.4]] ([[User talk:67.8.42.4|talk]]) 18:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


Can someone explain how survivors of a shipwreck 20 years after the disappearance built anything having to do with the colony? [[User:PacificBoy|PacificBoy]] ([[User talk:PacificBoy|talk]]) 01:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
== Proposed merge with Lost Colony DNA Project ==
Result of AFD (merge with [[Lost Colony DNA Project]] ) more than enough info in article to perform merge [[User:Ridernyc|Ridernyc]] ([[User talk:Ridernyc|talk]]) 17:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
:Merger completed per AFD. [[User:Ridernyc|Ridernyc]] ([[User talk:Ridernyc|talk]]) 17:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 04:52, 20 October 2024

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 11, 2019Peer reviewNot reviewed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 18, 2004, August 18, 2007, August 18, 2008, August 18, 2011, August 18, 2015, August 18, 2017, August 18, 2020, and August 18, 2023.

Citation style

[edit]

I propose switching the citation style to Sfn notes, which allow for citing different pages of the same work in separate citations, eliminating the need for the 'rp' template. I think the rp template, especially combined with the AMA style, makes the article hard to read, with unusual small parenthetical numbers between the regular footnotes and prose. UpdateNerd (talk) 11:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing summary

[edit]

I'm reading the summary in the intro paragraphs without having read the rest of the article, and I find it quite confusing. It's filled with bad forms like "while awaiting... Lane abandoned"; it omits crucial information (I assume everybody abandoned the colony in 1586, not just Lane, otherwise it's unclear why they had to build a whole new settlement later); and it's vague about roles and cause-effect relationships. For instance, the sentence "During a stop to check on Grenville's men, flagship pilot Simon Fernandes forced White and his colonists to remain on Roanoke." Why was Fernandes checking on Greenville's men, who were only mentioned in relation to the previous settlement? What Greenville's men were doing at that point? How did Fernandes force White and his colonists to remain on Roanoke? Does that mean that the circumstances forced them (in what way, though?), or that Fernandes gave them an explicit order? This whole concept is immediately contradicted by the following sentence anyway, which describes White going back to England with Fernandes. And what authority did Fernandes have? He's only described as "a flagship pilot", which is an obscure designation if not expanded upon (and it's not even hyperlinked). Kumagoro-42 (talk) 05:27, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried reading the rest of the article, but gave up. Like the lead, it is a confusing mess. It seems to be simultaneously excessively detailed while also lacking critical context. CAVincent (talk) 08:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello! I've created a navbox to group the various topics surrounding the Roanoke Colony:

I'll leave it under construction for a week or so. Feel free to contribute! StevePrutz (talk) 14:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2024

[edit]

Peaceful and Lovely ABig Garden full of normal…just normal…ok!

Huh?

[edit]

“The colonists may have possessed the resources to construct another seaworthy vessel, using local lumber and spare parts from the pinnace. Considering the ships were built by survivors of the 1609 Sea Venture shipwreck, it is at least possible that the Lost Colonists could produce a second ship that, with the pinnace, could transport most of their party.”

Can someone explain how survivors of a shipwreck 20 years after the disappearance built anything having to do with the colony? PacificBoy (talk) 01:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]