This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Dakota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of South Dakota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South DakotaWikipedia:WikiProject South DakotaTemplate:WikiProject South DakotaSouth Dakota articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Hi User:Zigzig20s, could you take another look at sourcing here? I only have a second now, am not sure if quote is actually in the NRHP nomination or if it is from other source that I can't see. There was confusion, I think i fixed, about what 1910 newspaper said, according to the NRHP doc. --Doncram (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Doncram: The article I cited was published on May 14, 1984 (please see the reference). It's a direct quote. Apparently the NRHP nomination form copied from it verbatim, except they added "(dark brown trim over tan)".Zigzig20s (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Zigzig20s, oh, okay, good, now it makes perfect sense. I see now that the version you had done was exactly correct. But i think it should be understandable that I got confused reading the NRHP nomination and seeing the 1910 version of same newspaper as a source, and also seeing the, well, apparently _plagiarized_ statement in the NRHP doc. Thanks for clarifying in the current version about 1910 vs. 1984 coverage too; it looks great! --Doncram (talk) 04:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
