Talk:Huey Long

Paragraph breaks in lead

Skyerise, can we please stop edit warring over the number of paragraphs in the lead? It's becoming disruptive. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, "a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs". Moreover, no editors found an issue with this in the FA process. ~ HAL333 13:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss content, not other editors. There is a change of topic from Senator to Presidential campaign. That requires a paragraph break per WP:PARAGRAPH. WP:LEAD's "four paragraphs" is a rule-of-thumb, not a hard limit. Skyerise (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

As it stands, the lead is broken down into four paragraphs: the first is a simple overview, the second covers his early life and lower state positions, the third covers his tenure as governor, and the fourth covers his career in the federal government. Regardless, you have no consensus for this massive change to an FA. Please revert it and gain consensus, or I will bring you to ANI. ~ HAL333 13:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Massive change??? I inserted a single line break. Also, you've now reverted my edit 3 times, while I've only reverted you 2 times. I'd be careful slinging around the term "edit-warring" if I were you. Technically, it only applies to editors who make more than 3 reverts on the same article in 24 hours. We don't go around posting warnings on user talk pages until an editor has make 3 reverts. Doing it after a single revert as you did a couple days ago is bullying. FA is not some kind of "protected status". And you won't know what the WP:CONSENSUS actually is until this discussion is joined by other editors and comes to a conclusion. Skyerise (talk) 13:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

You've reverted me three times and have not followed WP:BRD. This change has been reverted by two editors, although I am not sure if Aquabluetesla has strong feelings on the topic. ~ HAL333 13:39, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

No, I have not reverted you three times. My first edit added a paragraph break. It was not a revert of anything. I reverted once on the 1st, and once today. That's it. The other editor made the same edit, and reverted themselves. Skyerise (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Wrong: Bold edit, Revert 1,Revert 2, Revert 3. It's pretty clear cut. Please revert yourself back to the WP:STATUSQUO. ~ HAL333 13:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I guess now you're just trying to prove you are the bigger edit warrior. Even if you are correct about my 3 reverts, you are now at 4. I won't revert you again today, but I'd be careful about WP:BOOMARANG at ANI, if I were you. Skyerise (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I also oppose adding a fifth paragraph. Please stop it. Toa Nidhiki05 14:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Carl Weiss

In the main section of the article (before “Early Life”), the article states “Long was assassinated by Carl Weiss”. Should consider rephrasing this in light of contrary evidence such as https://circulatingnow.nlm.nih.gov/2018/09/11/letters-shed-light-on-huey-longs-murder-mystery/ DeniseLP (talk) 15:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the source, which is excellent and we'll be including it. By my reading, as of this datestamp this article gives due weight to presented evidence that Carl Weiss did not fire a fatal shot, as does the article on the assassination itself (which has a long subsection on the theory). By my reading, this interpretation of the evidence is still considered a minority view among biographies used for sourcing of this article. I'd be glad to hear discussion on the subject. BusterD (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

the source is Very Poor. the sited source states: "Ochsner was not present in the Capitol that night but in his letters he told DeBakey..." ie he's giving us hearsay--he heard it from mystery person XYZ and we have zero evidence on the credibility of XYZ (did XYZ see it himself or did XYZ hear it from ABC who heard it from DEF....) credibility of fourth hand hearsay = near zero. Ochsner goes on to speculate about politics saying he relies on "dope" (ie rumor) I recommend leaving it out. Rjensen (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Mention of Huey Long, as he is in Kaiserreich and Kaiserredux

Kaiserreich, and Kaiserredux, are two Hearts of Iron IV mods in which, when the Second American Civil War breaks out, he is the leader of the nation, The American Union State. This is significant, in that it is common knowledge within the community. But for some reason, when I put this down in text, it was reverted, with no further explanation. Until I have received comment, or a meaning as to why it has been removed, I am going to unrevert. Kingofmapps (talk) 19:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Mattmauler

Upon further inspection, it seems it was you perpetrated the revert.

'Not a noteworthy portrayal,' is incredibly debatable. I would say a good faction of those who follow the principles of Long today are inspired because of said portrayal (not necessarily a good thing, but a thing), and it has become a meme, and well-known thing in the community. While it may not be the knowledge of the average Joe, it is notable. Kingofmapps (talk) 19:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Wargamer is a reliable sourcd so I'll leave this partly in - but you'll need an article with more than a single mention have the "often" claim. I'll tidy the language up. Carlp941 (talk) 15:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

i checked Oswald mosley's page earlier and seen that it had kaiserreich mentioned on it. HistoricalFanatics (talk) 01:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Then it shouldn't've been there either. Remsense ‥ 论 01:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

It's significantly more prominent with Long than with Mosley. Huey Long is only popular outside of Louisiana and more so in the South because of Kaiserreich and Kaiserredux. I've given up on this point long ago, but there's an argument to be made within the constraints of WP:N. Kaiserreich even has it's own independent page now. Kingofmapps (talk) 13:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Please support the case for inclusion with some more sources! I don't have an objection to the content being include if there are more detailed sources around it. Carlp941 (talk) 22:12, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

The issue with this is, there aren't a lot of sources which cover this besides the one which I already inserted (WarGamer.) Kingofmapps (talk) 13:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

That is an issue, isn't it? Remsense ‥ 论 16:42, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree, it's also mentioned in the article for his portrayals in culture V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 04:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

It is an issue. What do you do if something is notable enough to be included (substantially so) but the source you have is discounted? It's an impasse, and the only way to resolve it is no inclusion at all, sadly. Kingofmapps (talk) 16:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to the talkpage. My intention with the initial revert and also the one I just performed is to limit the media section to important portrayals so that it does not become an exhaustive list of just mentions or appearances in pop culture. That kind of trivia can easily get out of control. The article does not discuss Long's portrayal in the game as significant imo (see my edit summary - he's barely in the article); rather, it focuses on the mod as being special/popular. I have reverted again because I also saw another user remove this info recently (i.e., in agreement with me), so I believe it should stay with the stable version while we discuss this.--MattMauler (talk) 01:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I gotta with ya here, Wargamer is a reliable source, but needs more detail specifically about Long's portrayal to merit inclusion. Happy to leave it out for now. Carlp941 (talk) 20:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

"only added in 2022"

...says the IP, who ignores it as being a re-addition because someone else quietly removed it. Remsense ‥ 论 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. DN (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)