User talk:Jwilsonjwilson/drafts/Montana Cattle Industry

Changes to Lead and sources

John, Made a slight change to the lead to emphasize that this is an article about the Montana Cattle Industry. Not exactly happy with it yet, but it will evolve as you flesh out the content. The Lead is extremely important in establishing the context of the article. Great work so far, keep at it and lets see some sources. --Mike Cline (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Mike, OK. As it now reads, it appears that Montana's industry happened simultaneously with that of the Spanish and predated the rest of the new world. My intent was to go from more general to more specific. Agree that Montana aspect should be emphasized up front. I'll try to effect that in a lead paragraph. See what you think. It does worry me that my intro talks about things like New World Cattle Industry and subdivisions of that which really should be dealt with separately and mainly referenced by this. I couldn't find anything like that just searching around. And if it is in fact missing, it would be a substantial job for somebody. My effort here then would run afoul of the argument of whether the title shold be separate WP:N (thus suggesting there should be articles for many other states, regions, provences, countries in SA etc.) or merged into New World Cattle Industry. Hoo boy, what a tangled web we weave. I note that each state etc, 'does' have its own section. I also note I'm not supposed to use that argument (WP:N someplace). If New World Cattle Industry or its equiv is currently absent, perhaps this could be written such that it could be expanded?? At least I don't doubt that New World Cattle Industry is and should be sufficiently notable to remain distinct from Old World Cattle Industry and perhaps Australian Cattle Industry.What about Pacific Island Cattle Industry? North America separate from South America? Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 06:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

It seems the custom to not point to references in the opening section, leaving those for the detailed explanations after the table of contents, yes? For now, I will have references which lean toward the DL valley cause that's what I've been reading. Bear with me... Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 08:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Typically that is the case. You are fleshing this out nicely.--Mike Cline (talk) 13:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Your change turned the short reference in Railroads into a very long one which is redundant with the ref in Sources. This doesn't seem to be what is usua1ly done. (?) (Also it's kind of hard to read.) (Oops, the Sign bot dinged me!)Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 18:24, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

John, I really shouldn't be imposing my preferred style of referencing on your draft, but I did. I think this style of full footnoting looks more professional than the more crytic style. Eventually the Sources section will go away and all inline citations will showup under the Notes section. An additional section named Further reading can then list general and specialist references on the Cattle Industry, not necessarily those sources used to verify the article content. Your preliminary organization looks good. Keep at it.--Mike Cline (talk) 22:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Professional is good. Need that for my book. I'll go with your style here.Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Potential sources

The bibliography and notes on this have some good sources

Got in my FAVORITES. Thanks! Also found several promising books in local library today. But when to read?? Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 07:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Tell a story, you are talking to the unwashed

John, work on your prose. Tell a story, not just the facts. Weave the ideas together. Tell us how the cattle industry got started. Explain it like you were talking to someone who doesn't know what a cow is or what they are used for. --Mike Cline (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

You know, I'd just love to do that. I'm certainly better at that then straight facting. However the admonishions have scared me away from that pretty much, as story telling weaves facts and opinions together, which can be difficult to justify in toto. For instance it's pretty clear to me that the Grants were using Montana pastures as early as 1850 or so but I see no direct proof for that til 1856. Again there was likely a brisk cattle trade going on unrecorded among the other mountaineers/traders in that period. And there is quite a story to tell about the effects on the plains of the deliberate destruction of the buffalo and final defeat of the Indians that in large part resulted, both during and particularly after the (un)Civil War. And all the references to Confederates and talking about their influence in early Montana. And the effects of the ending of that war concluding the frontier era. And then there's what comes after. Can I really talk about all that stuff without incurring the wrath of the reference Nazi's? Cause I'd just love to. Just who is the audience anyway? My reading of the intents of Wikipedia make it sound like it's scholars and this is intended to be timelessly accurate. But the 'great unwashed' will likely be a rather different crowd. They are more whom I would expect cause they will constitute the casual browsers. However I hadn't wanted to end up in endless rounds defending things that seem likely to me but may not be specifically mentioned anywhere I've looked. Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 07:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

John, although you can't make stuff up, indeed good prose is about weaving verfiable facts into a good story. WP is not for scholars, its for everyone. The one sentence in your Pre-Territorial paragraphs that prompted the comment above was the crytic reference to one fat for two lean. I knew what that meant, but the story can be told (and referenced) with more detail. The Stuarts and others figured out how to make a living by trading cattle with immigrants, fattening those cattle in the Beaverhead valley over winter and Spring. Its a good story. As you pull this together, focus on the Cattle, the industry and the people making it happen, that's where the detail and the sourcing needs to be. Limit the detail on the framing stuff like railroads, Civil wars, Indians, Buffalo, etc. to the absolute minimum necessary to tell the Cattle story. I can't wait until you get to the Mavericks and Vilgilant stuff.--Mike Cline (talk) 11:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Mike, thanks for encouraging words. No intent to make anything up unless compelled. 1 fat for 2 lean I agree, altho I saw it put just like that at least twice. See if you think I've got too much extraneous as I think some things just have to be there to understand how industry went from A to B to C. I'll minimize tho. As to Mavericks, I note that the Wiki article on Samuel Augustus Maverick makes no mention of any direct Montana connection, so I suppose you are talking about the cattle designation derived from his name (as in the unbranded part)(and not the last election either). And yes there are stories there. Teddy Blue Abbott is one good reference. For Vigilantees I guess you are mostly referring to Stuart's Stranglers rather than the earlier Virginia City group, yes? Also, if Mr. Maverick and his deserve such an expansive article, I can think of several cattle-associated Montanan's who should be likewise honored. After this I might create or expand on some of those. I notice for instance that there is no separate article for 'Mr. Montana, the pioneer of pioneers' Granville Stuart, only references in other articles. Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 05:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Re Mavericks. I was referring in general to the Maverick laws in the 1880-90s that were handled differently in Montana than in Wyoming where the Powder River War took place. Re the Vigilantes, indeed Stuart's Stranglers. I have been working a two Stuart articles--James and Granville--for sometime. You energy here should spur me on to finish them.--Mike Cline (talk) 10:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Spur! Have you looked at the Milner/O'Connor book? Good stuff on both! Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 07:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Own it and have read it twice, and actually have talked to Milner on several occasions via email. --Mike Cline (talk) 10:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Good. Never had nerve to actually talk to a book author. I'm currently in So Cal at Marriott resort. Am building article on my wd proc cause that feels easier than editting this directly. So block of text will appear shortly. Reading great book on MT ghost towns, published in 1961, as well as several on cattle industry. Trying to get feel for the why as well as the what. Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 06:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

You know, another person unsung here as near as I can make out is Awbonnie (Tookanka) Stuart. Also her daughter Mary Stuart Abbott. Awbonnie's life was kind of amazing all things considered. Also Capt. Richard Grant of HBCo. Anyway, one thing at a time. I propse to look into several of these people later. Don't want to get into too D.L. centric a place even tho that is major focus for now. Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 23:13, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Article is coming together nicely

John, you've done some good work. The article is coming together nicely. One thing you should avoid is putting links in section headings as it is discouraged by the MOS WP:HEAD. I read the following the other day and you might find it useful if you haven't already read it. Before Barbed Wire (ISBN: 0517029421 / 0-517-02942-1), Mark H. Brown, W. R. Felton, 1956. It is in part about photographer L.H. Huffman, but for the most part is about cattle and cowboys. --Mike Cline (talk) 14:57, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for kind words. Hoping it isn't getting too long as still much to include. Will of course be adding citations later. I'll look at book but already kind of drowning in info. Think it's OK to make lengthy description as with Nelson Story drive? Story should really have his own article I would think as should Johnny Grant and others. Also, OK to include verse as I did from Helena Smith book? Hoping to get my brother to contribute to section on current state of industry as he is somewhat involved with it.Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 07:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Coming along - When do you think it will be ready for prime time?

John, have been following along as you put this together--very comprehensive. Still needs in-line citations and images. I'd be willing to help along that line. From a copyedit standpoint, I suspect there's some wording that will get peoples attention. One thing you might do is review Words to Watch to see if any of your prose is pushing on that advice. Again, let me know if I can help with some images and such. --Mike Cline (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Must admit I'm getting a bit tired of this not being done. At the same time a bit afraid people will not like it. I'm making a push now. I find it hard to cite while I write so plan to go back to much of it later. Pictures would be nice but not clear what I can include without violating somebody's copywrite. Suggestions? Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

On the images, start browsing the commons, for example: [1], to see what's already available. Additionally, any images in literature published before 1923 are in the public domain and can be used. If you can't find them digitally, then just scan from hardcopy books or copy from PDF files. Another source will be the federal government, particularly the Library of Congress and National Archives, there's lots of images available there, you just have to search for them. You don't need a lot of images but a half dozen or so would really spice up the article. As I muck around, if I find some images that might fit, I'll send you the links. Don't worry about what other editors think, its a very good article so far by WP standards. --Mike Cline (talk) 10:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

For example:

Cattle Roundup, Great Falls, 1890

--Mike Cline (talk) 10:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

John - Flikr.com is a good source of photos when they are license right. This one has a creative commons license that would allow its use in Wikipedia - http://www.flickr.com/photos/cheezepix/1733045577/ --Mike Cline (talk) 15:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey thanks for bringing Con Kohrs pix etc. over. I'll definitely be doing more of that!Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

John, a couple of good sources

John, I've been working on the draft of the Nelson Story article and have been spending a lot of time in the MSU library. Two books you ought to look at in regards this subject.

• Kennedy, Michael S. (1964). Cowboys and Cattlemen-A Roundup from Montana The Magazine of Western History. New York: Hastings House Publishing.
• Brown, Mark H. (1961). The Plainsmen of the Yellowstone. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.

Both deal well with the early history of cattle in Montana. --Mike Cline (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanx! I'll check them out (literally & figuratively) Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Good to see you at it again

John, Its good to see you at it again. When you going to finish off this calf and bring it to market? --Mike Cline (talk) 16:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Soon I hope. Else I'll have some interviewees mad at me... Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)