Talk:Daniel N. Paul

Controversy
OK, which of these "rebuttals" to Mr. Paul actually mention him and which do not? If perchance they do not even mention the man, then they go over the top in terms of the amount of Original WP:SYNTH tolerable in a BLP article. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 22:56, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I think you are right - I think I have slipped a bit into original research. I will go back over this and straighten that out. I appreciate your work on this site.--Hantsheroes (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The original research is using a different author to rebut Paul's views of history, if that different author isn't specifically trying to rebut Paul's views (i.e. WP:SYNTH). They don't belong on this article, which is about Dan Paul, although another article about the historical events in question, ought to be the place to contrast Paul's views with other historians.  The only peer reviews of Paul that belong on this article, are the peer reviews that mention the article subject (Daniel N. Paul) by name, and what they said about him that was relevant.  If a reference doesn't even mention Daniel Paul, it is off topic to this article and belongs elsewhere.   Since you instead scrubbed one of Paul's most significant points, data about the scalping of Mi'kmaq families ordered by the Nova Scotia and Massachusetts governments (there is no such paper trail proof that the French did the same), it is starting to look like just the usual "whitewash" of history, for the benefit of one group's aesthetic tastes over another's, Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 12:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

My intention is not to "whitewash" history. Presuming negative intentions is unhelpful. I took the British bounty proclamations out of the controversy section because all scholars agree that they happened - there is no dispute on the matter. What is in dispute is whether or not the Mi'kmaq leadership supported killing protestant families. Of course there is not an official French proclamation for the scalps of British subjects - this would have been tantamount to them declaring war on the British. There are, however, extensive records at Louisbourg of the names of Mi'kmaq and Acadianss that the French paid for British scalps.--Hantsheroes (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daniel N. Paul. 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://archive.is/20130113000121/http://scc.lexum.org/en/1985/1985scr2-387/1985scr2-387.html to http://scc.lexum.org/en/1985/1985scr2-387/1985scr2-387.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)