Talk:Huey Long/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Removal of source under Historical reputation section

With regard to this edit...[1] The full quote here is "My guess is that he was a remarkable set of contradictions, still baffling to biographers"; I don't think this is a confident enough quote to use him as a source. Boldly removing; feel free to revert or discuss if need be.

Robert Penn Warren described him as a "remarkable set of contradictions".

I'm not sure what you mean by "confident enough quote". This is a well sourced citation that backs up what is said in the right context. How does "lack of confidence" constitute removal of seemingly WP:DUE RS, written by Robert Penn Warren, which by the way won him a Pulitzer Prize for writing on this exact topic? Why would we remove this? DN (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC) DN (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

The author entirely prefaces it as a "guess" about what Long's personality was, but the article chopped out that part of the quote. Guesses aren't actually useful and don't add much here. This quote doesn't offer anything at all, and that's before the fact was misleadingly chopped up; there's no actual benefit to including it, really. Toa Nidhiki05 19:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

It's not clear that what you are claiming isn't what the author intended. This was a retrospective piece written in 1981 by a highly respected writer. Why would he include it if he felt it was unimportant or should be dismissed? That seems quite unlikely and fairly presumptuous. To say it doesn't offer anything because the author wrote "I guess" seems a bit of a literal interpretation that lacks any nuance. IMO we can keep the quote from NYT by Warren, but you may include the whole quote (including the "I guess") since you feel it seems disingenuous without it. DN (talk) 01:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

The whole quote is somewhat intriguing:

My guess is that he was a remarkable set of contradictions, still baffling to biographers. But I had a great interest in what Huey did in his world, and a greater interest in Huey as a focus of myth. Without this gift for attracting myth he would not have been the power he was, for good and evil. And this gift was fused, indissolubly, with his dramatic sense, with his varying roles and perhaps, ultimately, with the atmosphere of violence which he generated.

If the whole quote were included - not just the brief focus on his personality - I'd support inclusion. It does give some insight onto the "populist hero vs. despotic authoritarian" mythology. Toa Nidhiki05 17:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I would support that. ~ HAL333 13:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with using the whole quote considering the source. If Aquabluetesla doesn't have any objections, I'm happy to do the legwork. DN (talk) 17:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Including the original quote was misleading as the full quote seems to me to be an attempt at trying to understand Huey Long as it includes the word guess. It doesn’t seem to be a fully confident statement. I don't think the quote originator's status as a winner of an award (although notably prestigious) necessarily justifies including it either. Aquabluetesla 01:30, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

This brings up an interesting question. Should this article only be limited to political aspects? IMO, the obvious answer is no. DN (talk) 05:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

What exactly is the point of this article in your view? While I empathize with anyone's inability to grasp a particular purpose on one thing or another, I typically try to ensure I am not using an Argument from incredulity, especially when it comes to quality sources such as this. DN (talk) 05:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll put it this way, the phrase "I guess" can be interpreted in different ways. I challenge you to provide evidence that it's use here can only be interpreted as "I don't know" vs. "I think so". Also, keep in mind that everyone else here seems to agree this content bares some WP:WEIGHT...DN (talk) 18:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

If there's no consensus for adding the quote in whole, I would like to keep the original truncated quote. I believe it improves the article and Warren's perspective is relevant due to his close relationship with Long. ~ HAL333 20:55, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I strongly oppose re-adding the short, misleading, clipped quote that provides essentially no value beyond a guess. Toa Nidhiki05 22:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Aqua has yet to provide solid reasoning for exclusion, but I think Toa is trying to be reasonable in an effort to reach consensus. I still find the arguments that "it takes up too much space" or "isn't confident enough" to be without merit, considering the source. At the very least, I think we should include the "i guess" portion, and let readers use the citation if they need further clarification. DN (talk) 01:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I propose a shortened version, as Aqua requested, that includes the preface that Toa requested. If HAL and Generalrelative agree that it is acceptable I will add it in per WP:CONACHIEVE.

My guess is that he was a remarkable set of contradictions, still baffling to biographers. But I had a great interest in what Huey did in his world, and a greater interest in Huey as a focus of myth. Without this gift for attracting myth he would not have been the power he was, for good and evil.

DN (talk) 07:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This version is much more acceptable than how it was before its removal. I am okay with the entire quote being used in the article. I've edited my previous statements regarding this discussion.

Aquabluetesla 16:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I personally would prefer the whole quote be used - the bit at the very end about the culture of violence that Long was surrounded with is really important. His legacy isn't just as a despot, but someone who was assassinated - he used force to impose his will, and was killed by force in the end. I think that sort of encapsulates all of the feelings the writer was trying to express. Toa Nidhiki05 16:49, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I understand your feelings here, and I do not see any issue with using the whole quote. Aqua is the only standout so far, the majority, so far, is to include the whole the quote. DN (talk) 17:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I am okay with the inclusion of the full quote. Aquabluetesla 17:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)