Template:Did you know nominations/Booker T. Washington State Park (West Virginia)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Booker T. Washington State Park (West Virginia)

 * ... that Booker T. Washington State Park (location pictured) was the only West Virginia state park operated on the basis of racial segregation? Source: 1. O'Brien p. 105; 2. Jet p. 8; 3. Delta Democrat-Times p. 8
 * Reviewed: Gustave Lambert and "Ich steh an deiner Krippen hier"

Moved to mainspace by West Virginian (talk). Self-nominated at 01:13, 18 December 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Size and date check out; interesting subject; well-referenced; hook checks out and is referenced; an Earwig check indicates copyplag shouldn't be a concern. Image is a USGS map; not sure how it would resolve on the main page at this size, but it is acceptable from a licensing standpoint. One note to - you only need a single QPQ per article nominated, and this is a single nomination, so you can "bank" the other for the next DYK you submit. I believe this should be good to go.


 * I pulled this from prep because the notion that, in 1949, there was only one racially segregated such facility in W. Va. is obvious nonsense. The article itself says this facility was the only one open to blacks, so obviously all the others were segregated as well. What in the world is going on here? EEng 04:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * . The thing is that's what the sources, from the period, say: - The Bushranger One ping only 09:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

"Whites will be permitted to use facilities at the Booker T. Washington state park in Institute, W. Va., previously opened only to Negroes, as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court ban on Jim Crow public-supported facilities. State Conservation Director Carl J. Johnson said the park is the only state-owned recreation area which has been operated on the basis of racial segregation."


 * and, I would like to thank you both for taking the time to ensure that this hook is the best that it can be for inclusion in DYK. As the primary author of this article and of the hook in question, I carefully chose this wording because it was the wording used in the supporting references. As The Bushranger states above, Jet magazine used this wording, as did the Delta Democrat-Times, 1954 (p. 8). I believe this wording was used because Booker T. Washington State Park was created because of the racial segregation in the other state parks. The other parks were not created because of segregation, but this park was. As always, I would appreciate suggestions for alternative hooks, especially if anyone feels that this hook is not sufficient. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, if you read the entire section Development of state recreational facilities for African Americans it's pretty clear what's going on. State parks were de jure not closed to blacks, but de facto were. The state opened this one park for blacks, and as a kind of joke (or, perhaps, to keep white do-gooders from setting a bad example by consorting with Negroes) actually made it official policy that only blacks could use it. So, yeah, it was "the only state-owned recreation area which has been operated on the basis of racial segregation" – on paper. Then, in the wake of Brown, this state official made a show of voiding that policy, though "no further changes would be made to state park policies" i.e. there continued to be no official bar to blacks entering other parks, but of course they would still feel "ill at ease" i.e. know they might get the crap beat out of them, or worse, if they dared to. Look, you've got a modern scholarly source (O'Brien) – what does it say? I'm guessing that using O'Brien we can construct a much better hook highlighting the hypocrisy of the "desegregation" of this one park. EEng 17:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Here we go, O'Brien p.172n36: "Booker T. Washington State Park was desegregated by 1955 and quickly faded into obscurity. By 1956 the Conservation Commission’s annual reports no longer listed the park among its units." So that's a good hook:
 * ALT1 ... that Booker T. Washington State Park (West Virginia), created 1949 as West Virginia's only state park accessible to blacks, disappeared almost immediately after it was desegregated in 1954?
 * We'd still need to make sure the article has what's needed to support that, and is free from other contradictions such as discussed above. EEng 17:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , I wrote this article to tell the story of this park, provide the contexts in which this park was created and existed, and shed light on the hypocrisy of West Virginia's state park system during this era, so I appreciate your attention to ensuring that it has an appropriate hook. How about one of the following alternative hooks? I'm removing the image as it is unlikely to be selected for DYK. My only concern for the ALT1 hook is that the park was desegregated in 1954 but otherwise I like it, too. -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the year. EEng</b> 20:48, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ALT2: ... that the 7.43 acres Booker T. Washington State Park was the only West Virginia state park explicitly open to African Americans until 1954? -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ALT3: ... that by 1954, West Virginia's state parks totaled 40355 acres, of which only the 7.43 acres Booker T. Washington State Park was explicitly open to African Americans? -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ALT4: ... that prior to creating Booker T. Washington State Park, West Virginia's state parks justified its segregation policy by explaining that "our Negro citizens would feel ill at ease" using parks alongside whites? -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, there are some problems:
 * ALT2: I don't see that blacks were explicitly allowed anywhere new beginning 1954.
 * ALT3: I'd change it to read ALT3a (reducing overprecision along the way): ... that in 1954, West Virginia's state parks totaled 40,000 acres (16,000 ha), of which only the 7-acre (3 ha) Booker T. Washington State Park was usable by African Americans?
 * ALT4: As obvious as it is to you or me what's going on, we'd need a source to characterize the statement this way. Let me suggest
 * ALT5: ... that Booker T. Washington State Park, with 0.01% of West Virginia's state park acreage, was the only state park open to blacks, and after it was desegregated in 1954 it almost immediately disappeared? BTW, Booker T. Washington State Park needs to be turned into a dabpage -- I don't know how to do that. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 20:48, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Assuming the 1956 date above can be cited in the article, perhaps "...and was open for less than eight years?" or "...was closed less than two years after being desegregated?" might be a good hook basis. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * and, I moved the previous Booker T. Washington State Park article to Booker T. Washington State Park (Tennessee) and made Booker T. Washington State Park a disambiguation page. Also, the 1956 date is incorrect because the West Virginia Blue Book lists the park in its 1957 issue. The 1958 issue of the West Virginia Blue Book did not list any of the state parks, and by the 1959 issue, the park is omitted from the list of state parks. Based upon the West Virginia Blue Book, we can deduce that the park was disestablished sometime between 1957 and 1959, and definitely by the time the NPS released its 1960 tabulation of U.S. state parks. I am going to update the page to incorporate the information regarding the 1958 and 1959 issues of the West Virginia Blue Book. I have a preference ALT3a. -- West Virginian   (talk)  23:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That kind of investigation is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Use what O'Brien says (quoted above). <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 23:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * With that said, I would also support ALT4 since it is quoted from O'Brien. I would also be fine with ALT5 with the omission of the last part since there are no sources with a clear disestablishment date or year. Unfortunately, the park's closing was not included in any of the local newspapers, and West Virginia State University does not have any information about the park in its archives. As always, I remain open to your suggestions and will do anything I can to be accommodating and true to the sourced references. -- West Virginian   (talk)  23:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The last part of A5 is directly from O'B, quoted above. On the other hand, can you quote me what O'B says that's the basis for A4? <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 00:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , because the park is still listed in an official listing of state parks in the 1957 West Virginia Blue Book, we cannot say with certainty that it was disestablished in 1956. The Blue Book is published each year by the West Virginia Legislature and it is an official and comprehensive guide containing information on all the branches and divisions of West Virginia's state government. The O'Brien reference is otherwise a seemingly reliable source, but an official state record lists the park as being open in 1957. The quote in ALT4 is from O'Brien on p. 105 in the upper right-hand column. -- West Virginian   (talk)  01:25, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, that's a good source for A4 (which I've edited a bit). Personally I like it best for its calmly blatant hypocrisy. If you agree, I suggest you strike all the other ALTs to spare the reviewer trouble, and then ping him/her (The Bushranger) back for the tick. (You have to watch out for ticks when visiting a state park, I've heard.) <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 19:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your suggestion and I concur. I've stricken the original hook and ALTs 1, 2, 3, and 5. I support the tweaked version of ALT4 as written above., would you be able to re-review the hook as written and provide any further feedback here? Thank you both for all your attention to this matter, and Happy New Year to you both. The hook, and the article, are better now because both of you have worked hard to improve it. -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * SPOOOOOOON! Er, I mean, Symbol confirmed.svg tick. And thanks to you both for making this a very pleasant discussion with things caught, discussed, and fixed in the way Wikipedia is supposed to work. The new hook verifies, checked out to O'Brien, and the article is even more "everything" than when I first reviewed it. Earwig re-check minding changes indicates copyplag rule OK. Good to go, and thanks again to both of you, this has been a good refresher for my faith in Wikipedia. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Good. I was worried there for a bit that you or might have been offended by . <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 20:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * and, in concurrence with The Bushranger, I thank you both for demonstrating Wikipedia at its best! Thanks again for all your tremendous work, and patience with me. I look forward to working with both of you again very soon! -- West Virginian   (talk)  22:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Kumbaya, my Lord, Kumbaya! <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 22:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm capable of taking a New Year's joke. Comtraya! The Bushranger One ping only 22:43, 1 January 2018 (UTC)