User talk:Sanfrangiantsfan

May 2011
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ernest Lundeen, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Orange Mike, my apologies for not including an edit summary. I just made the edit but included a detailed edit summary this time. Thanks for pointing that out. Sanfrangiantsfan (talk) 01:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Sanfrangiantsfan
 * The answer is not to remove the content; the answer is to expand upon and add nuance to the section, going to some of the same sources that Frye used to add insight as to what was going on, what Lundeen's motivations seem to have been, and so forth. Viereck was apparently a persuasive guy, and as a Milwaukeean I understand that Germany was not a demon to much of anybody in the States at that time. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Orane Mike, shouldn't the onus be on the author of those out of those comments to add appropriate context if he is to put that on the Wikipedia page? Since this entry is quite short, the paragraph on allegations that Lundeen was working with a German agent take up much of his biography, which owing to the dubious nature of the claims is inappropriate. I am Senator Lundeen's great-grandson and there is no doubt in our family that he was a patriotic American. Certainly he was an Isolationist and of that there is no doubt. I don't currently have the time to add all the information and context to the page that it deserves and that's why I felt the section on his relationship with the German agent should be eliminated. But if that's against Wikipedia protocol, then I will I guess have to wait until I have enough time to add all the information and context required. Thanks for discussing. SanfrangiantsfanSanfrangiantsfan (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm somewhat sympathetic to Lundeen's situation, and suspect that he was being grossly abused by Viereck, as Viereck and his ilk misused many another patriotic American. But the solution is not to delete, but to expand. Find good scholarly histories of the Farmer-Labor movement and add more to the article from them; and (by the way) fully disclose your conflict of interest, something you had so far failed to do. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Orange Mike. My apologies for not posting the 'conflict of interest.' While I disagree there is one, since I never met my great-grandpa and stand nothing to gain from eliminating slanderous statements against him, I was not aware of that requirement. I'm fairly new to wikipedia, but will be sure to mark the 'conflict of interest' that in the future. Sanfrangiantsfan (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)Sanfrangiantsfan
 * At this point, in your shoes, I'd just put a note on the talk page of the article that mentions the relationship. I put mentions on my userpage of affiliations that might lead to COI concerns (re: my union, politics, employment, etc.); but that's me. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)