Talk:Randolph L. Braham

Sourcing and stern warning

I give up on sourcing. Every line of this entry is available in any of the in-text cites (NY State assembly, Congressional Record). The selected bibliography is sourced at any Library, of course including the Lib. Of Congress

Shlishke (talk) 02:16, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Jewish ancestry

Any reason for not mentioning his Jewish ancestry? It seems substantial.--92.77.210.248 (talk) 10:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Can somebody remove the "Warning libel he is living notice" at top?

See subject.

He's dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shlishke (talk • contribs) 23:35, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Can someone remove the "needs verification" tag at the top?

As I noted a few years ago, above. I, Shliske, am the main editor and watch-lister for this article. I am the son of the historian Randolph L. Braham, and know well the importance of accuracy in the writing of history.

Now I just can't find the damn template tag to remove it.

Revisions of editing and questions, statements

I've just reverted completely, basically, the article after an unannotated major revision. I understand the good intentions, but the lack of "respect" (for what that's worth) before making something as crucial as name change, by not bringing it up here, is as a scholarly (even Wiki-world level) matter not the best. The other "helpful" change of installing a reference is simply weird.

1. I know his middle name is "Lewis" because I have his naturalization papers.

2. The revert of the other change--moving the day-after NYTimes obit to the very first word of the article as a reference, because a: it makes no sense (wait, we need a cite to prove he's dead before continuing the piece? Why _this_ cite?) and b: organizing the entire wealth of supplemental material after the running text, batching the obits with the other outside commentary on his life ("external biography") makes sense. Shlishke (talk) 18:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Shlishke, this is the edit you reverted and are calling "simply weird"; it was not a major revision. We have reliable sources, including the New York Times, that say "Louis" was his middle name. If that's wrong, we need to see something in support of "Lewis". Also, there is a lot of unsourced material in the article that needs to be sourced or removed. SarahSV ^(talk) 17:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi back...the "major" part was regarding the man's very name. (The tenor of my comment above was because no note was made of the annotation by the revisor.) The move of the reference I called "weird," and reverted back, was because a reference is generally called for to back up one point or another, and Ive never seen a Wiki bio of a contemporary deceased individual with such a thing.

As to the gathering of "references" considered as a whole (the references proper, the others in the "see also" material): Wiki articles follow no Chicago or any stylebook whatsoever, from the most technical articles to those more of a general nature, such as this one. The division of the supplementary material here is in what I believe is the most easily understood organization for the casual reader to get a sense of who he was, what he said and wrote, and what other people said and wrote about him. Nothing more.

About the spelling of his middle name--I thank you and the first reviser for noting the discrepancy, and took the point by noting in running text that there are a number of published references to his name spelled "Louis."

Am I to send "you"--who is "we" in "we need to see something?"--a copy of his naturalization papers? I understand you are working on the presumption that any editor (eg me) may pull a "who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes" routine, to which you will answer "The NYTimes." Wherever the hell is name is published with "Louis," I doubt I can (or will) ask for a retraction. What do you suggest?

I hope I am not coming off as adversarial here. The respect for history shown here is an honor to the subject.

Shlishke (talk) 22:29, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Shlishke, the problem with the article is that it's heading in the direction of hagiography. Braham was an important historian, and we need a professional-looking bio for him, written in the usual Wikipedia style and well-sourced. (When I say "we" , I'm referring to editors working on this article and Wikipedia in general.) This earlier version was closer to what's needed, although it wasn't comprehensive. The article should have an "early life" section, "education", "career", then "writing" or "research". "Personal life" can be added at the end, or personal details can be woven throughout the other sections. Everything needs a reliable source. I'll try to find a good article about a historian that could be used as a model.

As for the middle name, and the moving of the source: I moved the source to support the name. The article should use inline citations, not general sources listed at the end of the page. See WP:CITE. If you have documents supporting a different middle name, you can email them to me here, or to the volunteer response team (info-en-o@wikimedia.org) and an uninvolved editor can look at them and report here. The more recent the document, the more helpful it would be. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I looked for a featured-article of a historian, but I can't find one. But Timothy D. Snyder isn't bad. It's short and under-developed, but it appears well-organized and properly sourced. You could also look at Yehuda Bauer. It has almost no inline citations, so it can't be used as a model, but it does tell us clearly who he is and what his positions are. Perhaps you could aim for some combination of the Snyder and Bauer pages. SarahSV ^(talk) 00:11, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Can someone help me out here, on a move/edit from one section to the other?

Sheesh, I can't get to an edit page of the entire article, just the sections. Did something change?

The reason is this: The section "Awards" is the first full mention--with cite of pertinent ref--of "The Geographical Encyclopedia"--but is referenced previously in the Wiesel quote in the section above.

So by rights a more solid mention of the book should be there. Which then raises a bibliographic, stylistic problem (which is easily satisfied in a "see also" kind of thing in print, but I have no clue here: the appended citation is rightfully expected to that book, and page number, if we're going to get all scholarly. And then put that (good, long) review/essay ("The Saddest...") next to the book-as-awarded-thing.

Can someone either futz with that, or, simply, tell me how to edit the whole damn thing w/o saving a cut, a paste, a cut, etc.? Shlishke (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I did not experience any change. Done what you wanted, if I understood you correctly.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC))

Can't find edit place in the biobox to add essential quick fact

As noted in article's first sentence Braham spent his academic career partly at the Grad School (with office and secretary and all), heading the institute he founded, mentoring grad students, etc., at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (as I copied from its wiki entry). In the published page, in the bio box/w picture, "Scientific research" is a header, followed by "institution." City College, yes, but as the article notes he left there in 1992, and the Grad School itself is proud to note his long career there (I don't feel like doing the math at the moment to figure when he moved there, using the institute founding year, and it's unnecessary anyway). I can't find that tiny subsection on the edit page for the life of me. Any help? Shlishke (talk) 19:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Biobox?

Shlishke, please tell the most concise possible, what (X) you to change to what (Y) in the article, like a pseudocode. Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC))