Talk:Francis Pegahmagabow

aboriginal?

"aboriginal" or "First Mations"? RickK 00:53, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Ah, that would be First Nations. :) Now, to check the article, Weaponofmassinstruction 05:29, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

not the single most effective

Deathphoenix edited prior copy to suggest Francis Pegahmagabow was not the single most effective sniper of WWI. This is contrary to all the historical references I've seen, online and off. I've re-edited the opening line to reflect the historical reality -- which AFAIK needs no qualification. Cheers, 05:26, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, if that's what you want to do. I have nothing but the highest respect for Francis, but being the single most effective is a bit of a strong statement. Of all the combatants that fought in WWI as snipers, Francis was the single most effective sniper, 100% verified that he made the most kills and most captures? Historical records from WWI are incomplete. Even the number of kills (378) is unverified (hence I changed it to up to 378). Given all these inconsistencies, who's to say who was the single most effective sniper for both sides? For the Allies? For the Canadians? I am nothing short of amazed at his accomplishments (so I intend to work on this article as much as I can), but I have a hard time accepting that he was the single most effective sniper of WWI. Such a statement is POV and changes depending on who you ask. --Deathphoenix 12:33, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BTW, you're right about Francis being the most highly decorated aboriginal soldier. I even knew that, so I have no idea what I was thinking when I corrected that. Sorry. --Deathphoenix 14:01, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Assessment

I have assessed this as Start Class, as it contains more detail and organization than would be expected of a Stub, and of mid importance given his prominence in World War I. Cheers, CP 21:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

some suggestions

I was thinking about making this article my first solo review, but I on second thought, I do not think I know enough about the type of subject to judge, but I do have some thoughts. First, the sentence "...the First Nation soldier most highly decorated for bravery in Canadian military history and the most effective sniper of World War I." makes me wonder if the wikilink should be First Nations and linked to that article rather than the aboriginal article.

Also might want to reword to say, "...the most highly decorated First Nation soldier for bravery in Canadian military history and the most effective sniper of World War I." It is less confusing. I had to read it a few times to figure out why "the" was used instead on "a".--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The thing that kept me from doing the review is that there are a lot of sections with very little information. I know the information that is available is scarce, but sections with just one sentence do not seem appropriate to me. Under the circumstances of the topic, I do not know if this is a valid criticism or not.

Also there are a lot of commas that are missing. I'm going to add a few, but you might want to have someone copy edit. --Ishtar456 (talk) 14:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, more suggestions,

1. "prior to the war", which war? 2. "Pegahmagabow preferred the much hated Ross rifle" Preferred it to what? 3. "He saw action at the" sounds crass. Maybe, saw combat?, entered combat? became engaged in combat?

I have made some minor changes, but on third thought think maybe this is a "quick fail" :( Sorry. Very interesting topic though. Please, don't give up. --Ishtar456 (talk) 15:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

not "auto"

One more thing: "Autobiography: Hayes, Adrian. Pegahmagabow: legendary warrior, forgotten hero (2003 ed.). Fox Meadow Creations. ISBN 9780968145289. - Total pages: 95"

It is not an autobiography, unless it is written by the subject of the book.--Ishtar456 (talk) 15:31, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Quick review

Hi, I can see a lot of good work has gone in to this article and I found it quite interesting to read, however, I'm not sure that this article would currently pass a GA review as there are a few issues that I think need dealing with. Rather than starting the review and failing it, I have listed a number of points that I feel should be addressed. Whether or not you choose to act on them is entirely up to you.

• it is generally considered incorrect to use the heading "Biography" in such an article as the whole article is a Biography (I would suggest headings such as Early life, Military career, Political life, Family and legacy;

• Done -- Esemono (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• the Family and Legacy section is incorrectly capitalised (should be Family and legacy);

• Done -- Esemono (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• I suggest including the popular media information in the legacy section;

• Done -- Esemono (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• there is some inconsistent use of terminology (First World War, but also World War I);
• the lead makes the claim that Pegahmagabow was the most effective sniper and the most decorated First Nations soldier, but neither of these are mentioned in the body of the article,

• Done -- Esemono (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• the template ribbon at the bottom of the article would look better if it were collapsed, IMO,
• Is there more detail that could be added to the After the war section, it says he continued to serve, but doesn't say for how long (yet the infobox says his service ended in 1919 - do you know this, or are you assuming?)
• In the Biography section it starts off with very little detail. I would suggest adding in an Early life subsection and mentioning things like his birthdate and place, also parents, education, etc. A good example of a biography article to look at is: Frederick Scherger, which is a Featured Article and might provide some more ideas on development;
• wikilink "Distinguished Conduct Medal" in the World War I section;

• Done -- Esemono (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• I suggest not including the citations for the medals, but in fact convert them into prose describing the subject's actions;

• Done --

• there are a number of hyphens that should be endashes per WP:DASH, for instance in the infobox, and the page ranges for the refs;

• Done --

• regarding the image in the infobox, I think you need to specify the source. Is it scanned from a book? If so what are the details of the book? If it is a web site, can you please provide a link?

• Done --

• in the References section some of the composition titles are not consistent with Wikipedia:MOSCAPS#Composition titles
• there is a mixture of US and British English spellings, for example you have "honour" but also "honored".

• Done --

Cheers. Good work so far and good luck with developing the article further. AustralianRupert (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

That's possibly because "honour" is the Canadian spelling for "honor".

Just a reminder, Francis Peghmagabow is a Canadian first nation soldier. This article probably was started and still edit mostly by Canadians, since they will have a more in depth knowledge of the history of Indigenous. While Wikipedia is a pretty national wide site with collaborators from different areas around the world, it does makes sense that the spelling was not exactly unanimous. TheeChEese (talk) 03:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Francis Pegahmagabow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110610130431/http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/3crpg/eng/stories/06aug01-eng.html to http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/3crpg/eng/stories/06aug01-eng.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francis Pegahmagabow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120403021053/http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20050527_180400_6736 to http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20050527_180400_6736
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/databases/cef/001042-119.02-e.php?image_url=http%3A%2F%2Fdata2.archives.ca%2Fcef%2Fgpc013%2F571983a.gif&id_nbr=572634

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

not the most aboriginal decorated !

I made the changes several times, delete each time, my links removed every time, I know that the official story said for 100 years that he is the most decorated but IT'S FALSE !! I have been doing research on the subject of aboriginal veterans for 18 years now, looking for the list of Canadian soldiers who have received 3 MM. In the list you will see the name of Jerome Frank Narcisse, this sergeant is a Mi'kmak from Quebec. before deleting the contribution by accusing people of conflicts of interest, inquire! When to source, all the sources you use and cite below, including biographies, newspaper articles or government site! are derived directly or indirectly from data published by Fred Gaffen and Whitney Lackenbauer, all of which is a copy of the data published on March 31, 1919 by the Indian Affairs Office. None are from comprehensive research or compilations of data. Quoting sources is good, but you have to make sure that it's not just copy-paste, which is the case here. In passing, it removes the fact that I write that it is not the most decorated, then lower in the article we talk about Tommy Prince. In summary therefore, Peggy is not the most decorated, information based on 18 years of research, we delete this info based on copy paste, not very serious .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativeveteran (talk • contribs) 18:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

• Can you give us a reliable source, then? We can't include claims that are not backed up with a source that meets Wikipedia's standards. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 21:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

copy above of the links leading to his military file and his medal cards, where it is clearly indicated that he is a native and that he has received 3 MM; I also put the link to the file that I put on him even if I know in advance that it will not be admissible from you, and copies of links leading to photos on social networks. There is no official writing, since the official writings have completely forgotten him! This requires research to succeed in discovering the history of Sgt JEROME, all who say it's wrong how many years of research on the subject behind them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativeveteran (talk • contribs) 03:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't think any of those sources are acceptable—that's not saying they're incorrect or anything, they're just not the sort of sources Wikipedia accepts. Something we can do, though, is remove the statement that Pegahmagabow is the most-decorated First Nations soldier. I know it must be frustrating, but Wikipedia only reports what published sources say—Wikipedia does not report original research. Perhaps there's a historian, an organization, or a journalist you can take this information to? If they were to publish it somewhere, then Wikipedia could report that, too, then. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 03:15, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

If archival documents are not reliable sources, but copy paste is; then it completely questions the reliability of Wikipedia articles. Most of the sources that are quoted in this article are from personal research, often false or misleading if we think of the author Boyden. Organizations or sites like wikipedia do not want to hear about Sergeant Jerome because the writing is not official, officials and newspapers do not want to hear about it because organizations and sites like wikipedia don't want write about him ... we turn a little in circles, do not you think? Basically Wikipedia is not a site where you can publish articles to inform the world? if the article contains errors, we should be able to change them; not to be swept away with the back of the hand ... As long as the information remains that it is not the most decorated, it is a step forward .... but I know that it will take all start again in less than a month .... really pity .... but I still with my questions, how many years of research on the subject of indigenous veterans have those who initially remove my amendment? do you do a semblance of research before deleting? 18 years of intensive research is worth absolutely nothing to a copy of a book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativeveteran (talk • contribs) 05:41, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Copy-paste? If there is copy-pasted information in the article, it needs to be removed per WP:COPYVIO. Could you point to what has been copy-pasted?

As to the rest of your comment, you should read through Wikipedia's policies such as Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. These policies are in place for good reason. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 06:06, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

References