Talk:Thomas Polk

Continental Congressman Category Kerfuffle (Cerfuffle?)
I wanted to convene all three of us on this issue, because I think the three of us should be able to come up with a solution to the question of whether or not Polk and persons like him should be in a category with other Continental Congressmen (as is now), or whether they should be left out. It appears to me that the three choices are:
 * Straight removal of the category from this page and others like him,
 * Including those who did not attend in the category, or
 * Creating a new category for folks who were designated but did not attend.

The problem is, I see the problem from both sides. From Kevin's perspective, factually, Polk and his ilk were not truly Continental Congressmen; they didn't do anything officially as delegates to the Congress of the Confederation, and would not have taken office. Thus, categorizing them with other delegates may be misleading. From Eric's perspective (let me know if I'm putting words in your mouth), these men were "elected" as delegates by the state legislatures, which is the only qualification appearing in the Articles of Confederation for being a delegate to Congress. The Articles, lacking the U.S. Consitution's Article VI, doesn't include language requiring an oath of allegiance to be sworn or any other such formality to toll the start of the Congressional delegate's term of office, although in practical application this differed depending on the Congress. Anyways, I would like to hear from both of you so that we can craft a well-reasoned solution.  Cdtew  (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to get my panties in a wad one way or the other, but yes he wsa elected but never attended but I believe that qualifies as a member. Then again I think when most people think of "Continental Congress" they are thinking of the guys before and during the war. Maybe it would be better to have categories First Continenal Congress, Second, etc. Eric Cable  |  Talk  16:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, we could also address the fact that the accurate name would be Delegates to the Continental Congress from North Carolina.  Cdtew  (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

The category guidelines say that a category should be one of the "defining characteristics of a subject of the article". It's a stretch to say that one of Polk's defining characteristics was a job he didn't take. —Kevin Myers 20:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't much care for categories anyways -- I think they're relics of an earlier era and I don't think anyone uses them. In fact, I think the most use category links get is in Wikipedia arguments about whether or not categories should be deleted or whether or not a page is appropriately categorized.  But, given that's the metric, I tend to agree with Kevin that it should be left off of Polk.  EDIT:  That said, on the notability scale, Polk isn't that high.  His notability comes from people he's related to and I would hazard to say that the fact that he was elected to the Congress but didn't attend has a higher proportionate effect on his notability than it would for, say, Alexander Martin, who, as a more prominent politician would be less affected proportionately by not attending the Congress.  So, in other words, while a job he didn't take may not be a defining characteristic for Polk, the fact that he was elected to that job but never took it may be.   Cdtew  (talk) 00:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * To say that Thoms Polk is notable because of his family (James K.) would be like saying Joe Kennedy is only notable because of his sons. The fact remains that the Polks as a family were a BIG deal in North Carolina in the first half of the 19th Century. People see places like Fort Polk, Polk County, Polkton, etc. and ASSUME they were all named for James K. when they were not. Eric Cable  |  Talk  13:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not disagreeing with you, Eric -- What I'm saying though is that the fact that Polk was elected for the Congress but didn't attend may have a higher relative impact on his notability than for someone who is more intrinsically famous because of their deeds. In essence, I'm supporting your argument somewhat.   Cdtew  (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

One can make a reasonable case either way for including guys like Polk in the category. Long ago I considered including everyone or making categories for delegates who didn't attend but it seemed that the special section in the list of delegates was the better option. There are about 90 guys who were selected as delegates but never showed up. Whatever we do with Polk we'd want to do with the others. —Kevin Myers 18:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Reenactor Photo
I wish I had a picture of the actual person, but I do not, nor do I think one exists. Reenactor Jim Williams is well known in Charlotte as portrarying Thomas Polk at many events. Eric Cable |  Talk  18:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)