Talk:Maple, Wisconsin

On the section on history of the Town of Maple.

Having a history section on the Town of Maple, Wisconsin article is fine; but, it needs to be have citations and references. It is not censorship. I do know I decline to get into a edit war with the editor who should get an account with Wikipedia and the editor should explain the reasons on the discusssion page. Thank you-RFD (talk) 11:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the history section for reasons User:Nyttend had wrote about. The history section needs ciiations/reference and a NPOV. The editor should explain his/her views on the discussion page. Thank you-RFD (talk) 12:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The last paragraph read more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. "We in the older generations can only wish them well as we remind them of the importance of honest local life..." That's not the sort of tone an article is supposed to have. Without a source it could be copied and pasted from somewhere else. --Dual Freq (talk) 12:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It may have been better to say: "There are many in the older generations who wish the impressionable and vulnerable young well as they remind them of what their own passing generation feels is the importance of honest local life..." But I believe this would have been intellectually dishonest.

This exchange reveals a frightful weakness in Wikipedia, that near anonymous forces are controlling the public face of vital if controversial information shared, plainly and simply, with acts of censorship. History especially is vulnerable to this "editing" dynamic, and local history most especially. Where do you find sources for what hasn't yet been written or addressed anywhere else. Until dialogue is made possible by a first expression there is no movement toward greater shared truth. History belongs to the victor, but in the sterility of a monologue.

The Maple history section has now been deleted from Wikipedia in its entirety, and anyone routinely examining the site will be unaware that it ever existed, even in part. The same is true also for the entire article on "Old Brule" deleted also by "RFD" which contained information from the only history in any depth on northern Douglas County, Wisconsin, town government formation known to exist. Reference was made in an earlier summary to the original source materials and research in "Wisconsin Far Northwest: Brief Histories of the Rural Communities in Northern Douglas County," published by the Old-Brule Heritage Society in 2004.

I personally don't have the time nor energy to engage in an editing battle, and I will leave the floor to those who already occupy it, and who seem philosophically unwilling to recognize open and honest existential assessment of content and fact. Local governments and the freedoms they represent are in trouble throughout America. Years ago Justice Brandeis lamented the forces of bigness and centralization of authority in all spheres of life. Wisconsin towns, and even counties, are under threats of reorganization and extinction by the champions of economy of scale, efficiency and central state planning.

The pretense of objective posturing in the face of uncomfortable facts, even when provided without sources except for the open voice of the writer, especially in an area like local history, only serves the forces, such as those that would think to speak about any precious local government as of "minor" status. Our personal freedom goes with our local self governance. I had hoped that Wikipedia with the Internet might be a force to slow the centralizing process. Anonymous, heavy handed editing, will ensure that Wikipedia serves the forces that are undermining local and personal freedom.

Thank you for the space for discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.209.66.159 (talk) 15:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

In all fairness to myself, I did not deleted the Old Brule article; it was redirected to the Brule, Wisconsin article by a different editor.If you want to put in a history section then please put in the citations/references in the article. This is what Wikipedia requires and above all please sign up for a Wikipedia account. Thank you-RFD (talk) 16:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Sad to say it matters little if the article was "redirected," it's contents have disappeared entirely after being available for a year or so; and as far as a novice like me is concerned, with the article gone the contents are certainly totally unavailable for editing by me or anyone on the outside. I am content to leave the articles on the towns of Brule and Maple as they are. The only original source used appears above, together with my own experience in life. I will leave changes to the hidden order of inside experts. The missing materials will appear, and be available locally, in a better venue for them, another book to be out shortly. Thank you, and best wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.209.66.159 (talk) 02:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I still hope you will sign up for a Wikipedia account and give Wikipedia a chance. It is require to put in citations and references, have a Neutral Point of View, and no Conflicts of Interest. I think you have some connection with the Old Brule Heritage Society especially since you mention writing a book about the towns of Brule & Maple.Thank you-RFD (talk) 15:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I added a history section to the Town of Maple article complete with citation. It is a modest start and I hope it will help. It was when Maple was founded. I did the same thing to the Town of Brule article about when Brule was founded. Both references came from the Wisconsin State Historical Society. Thank you-RFD (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts, but it should be noted that the first annual meeting of the Town of Maple, effectively its true legal beginning, was April 2, 1907. Although a circuit court judge had defined the process by which the town could be formed in a 1906 decision, until a positive majority vote by the electors within the territory provisionally allotted to Maple was certified, there could be no town. These votes took place in February of 1907. The date in the reference chosen by Patricia Harrsch as the date of creation is not the date of full legal standing. Something similar is true for the founding date of the Town of Brule. It attained full legal standing in April of 1887. As for the Presidents listed as having fished on the Brule River, Ulysses S. Grant, listed in the Brule article, is not one of them. A man believed to be a mining engineer by that same name visited the Brule area at the time copper explorations were going on in earnest throughout the region, and it seems that at a later date a mistaken assumption was made that this man was the president, and this mistake has been copied for years.

I bring these facts up to underscore the fallacy that sourcing is a guarantee of accuracy. As failing, finite creatures we are vulnerable to the mistakes and actual deceptions that fill the assumed reality around us. We live by shared myth and approximations, blind trust and some disputable fact (witness our presidential races as caricatures of this). Paradigm shifts even upset rigorous physical science. An honest witness to all of this is as much as we have to rely on. Footnotes are valuable links, and a tool pointing to other sources, but they are not a link to Truth, even in Wikipedia.

The source for what I've said??? Perhaps mistaken memories of old newspaper articles from the 1890's, or from the 1900's; and how accurate were they? The larger philosophical issue, as relates to community beginning dates, is whether one believes it is that time at which some higher authority such as a judge leaves his preliminary imprint, or the later day when a community of citizens can first make the binding legal decision on their own to raise taxes in their community for a local road. The only source for these observations is the experience of years, and the decidedly non-neutral protestant point of view that the will of an authority takes second place to actions based upon free choice. Any encyclopedia suffers the limitations of its editor(s), struggling as finite creatures to cast their efforts in the light of omniscience. At my age when it comes to human beings, alone or in the group, I'm more interested in the questions and vagaries of life than in poses of neutral finality. I am forced then to let someone else assume historical authority, even the state. From the standpoint of freedom this is not a healthy situation. Thank you and best wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.209.74.191 (talk) 05:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for for kind remarks. I do volunteer work at my old high school with the archives and also with the alumni. Sometimes, I find mistakes of historical happenings, events that need to be corrected: of someone who died claiming to have graduated from my alma mater but who did not.I am sympathetic about your comments of "mistaken memories of old newspaper articles" and "the questions and vagaries of life". Realistically, these questions need to be resolved outside of Wikipedia. Again, thank you for your kind remarks. In friendship-RFD (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

PS I edited the Town of Brule, Wisconsin history section by omitting President Grant's name and using the Town of Brule's website as a temporary citation until a better citation comes along. Again many thanks-RFD (talk) 13:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

PS You were right!An Ulysses Sherman Grant from Northwestern University came to Brule, Wisconsin in the 19th century looking for copper deposits. I change the article Brule, Wisconsin to reflect this. Be encourage!In friendship-RFD (talk) 14:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I started an article about Professor Ulysses Sherman Grant. My thanks to whoever mention Professor Grant's name.I do not know if this help anything. Thank you-RFD (talk) 19:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)