Talk:Confederate Monument (Oxford, Mississippi)

Did you know nomination

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 SL93 talk 21:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Confederate Monument at the University of Mississippi

• ... that it cost an estimated $1.2 million to move the Confederate Monument (pictured) at the University of Mississippi? Source: "The estimated cost of the move is $1.2 million, which will be paid with private donations, not public money, the board said." [1]
  • ALT1: ... that the Confederate Monument (pictured) at the University of Mississippi had two explanatory plaques? Source: "After meeting with the chancellor and members of the university community, the committee expressed its desire to consider further input and reexamine whether the language on the plaque should be changed and, if so, how. After considerable input and study, the committee made its final recommendation, which was approved in June 2016 by Chancellor Vitter." [2]
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Fenner (sea captain), Template:Did you know nominations/2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres
  • Comment: Delayed nominating the article while it was at AfD. The result of the discussion was keep.

5x expanded by Hawkeye7 (talk) and Donner60 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 435 past nominations.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC).

• Article looks good. There are no major copyvios but I'd like the phrase "... American Civil War, almost the entire student body ..." to be worded differently because it's the same in the source but it's not a major problem. Image is freely licensed. Reviewing ALT0: The hook is interesting, matches the article and the source. ―Panamitsu (talk) 02:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• Y Re-worded the lead to remove the close paraphrase. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Quotes in the article

It is a pet peeve of mine that people somehow cannot get quotes into articles correctly. The quote at section Statue controversy is an example of such a bad quote. Just reading it should have caused the editor to realize a better source was needed. Notwithstanding the real blackeye, what valid source would have badly capitalized sentences?

The page currently contains:

to prevent the admission of the University's first African Student. it was also at this statue

This is from source historicengland.org.uk, which in itself seems a very questionable source.

The quoted text is quite easy to find elsewhere:

Historical Marker Database

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

Clarion Ledger, Apr 12, 2016, Jackson, Mississippi

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

Memphis Commercial Appeal, Sept 17, 2017

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

The Oxford Eagle, March 13, 2016

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

Blog: Kevin Levin, Historian, March 12, 2016

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

Ole Miss, University of Mississippi News, March 11, 2016

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

Paper: "A Brief Historical Contextualization...", May 16, 2016

to prevent the admission of the University’s first African American student. It was also at this statue

In short, not only was the cited site quite unlikely to begin with as a source for recent American history, it was the only site with this damaged quote, now copied onto Wikipedia. Quotes should be accurate, and accurately copied. Shenme (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I have corrected the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Salute

No, the soldier depicted in this statue is not saluting with his left hand. Even the Confederacy did not salute in that way. The figure in this statue is also not standing at attention. In the original positioning, the figure in this state was facing north-east, as if to observe the approaching Union Army. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JC Callaway (talk • contribs) 08:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll join in here: he doesn't seem to be saluting, but shading his eyes to scan the distant horizon, possibly keeping watch. It seems that he's a picket or a scout. Minturn (talk) 15:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. I immediately noticed that it was the wrong arm for a salute. However, that is what the Smithsonian source says, so to replace it, we need another reliable source. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

OK, that's fine, but only if you wish this article to perpetuate a mistake caused by some unknown person in the Smithsonian, who may not have known the difference. In any case, the figure in the statue is not saluting with his left hand, while not standing at attention. Unless, of course, we should assume that the figure is showing disrespect towards something. See Wiki's article on "Salute" for more accurate info. JC Callaway (talk) 06:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)