Talk:Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. 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/20130705115712/http://www.bpl.org/research/special/collections.htm to http://www.bpl.org/research/special/collections.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 06:49, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Name of the article

New England ASS was the original article. It was modified then modified back. See also the document history at Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. Not easy to combine them. deisenbe (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure what you are doing Deisenbe. This comment does not seem to be in synch with your actions. Is it necessary to remove the contents of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society article?–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:26, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I undid your renaming of the article because it remained primarily about the earlier (NE) society which was far mote important. I also edited it considerably and added material on the NE Society. The Massachusetts Society does not merit a separate article in addition to the NE one. deisenbe (talk) 15:31, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

You should look at the NE article, where the text from thid article was moved. deisenbe (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I will.

Let me look into it and see if anyone else weighs in on merging the two. I am returning the page until the merge discussion takes place. And, I am adding the merge templates to both articles.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I see. I assume you mean this edit from ten years ago.

I do think it's better, if merging, to have the MASS content merged into the NEASS article. I need to wake up more to sort through this - I am foggy today and focused on another article at the moment.

It sounds like at two different points in time we both thought the articles should be merged. But I am ten years smarter on Wikipedia than I was then. Let me think through what I would recommend now and present it here for you. Please give me the day.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Deisenbe I looked at a comparison of the two articles here and I would say that they are essentially duplicates of one another.

At this point, it seems to me that the options are:

• Return the redirect on the MASS page that you added today.
• Rewrite the NESS to just be about that organization, removing the MASS info. And vice versa, with just a few sentences to bridge the two articles.

Either way, it looks like there could be a bit of cleanup. I lean towards your approach with the redirect as it's less work, covers both organizations, and shows the relationship between the two. It would be interesting to hear other opinions.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

The fastest thing is to restore the redirect. I agree the article could well be split but it's a question of priorities. deisenbe (talk) 01:45, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay, Deisenbe. I'll restore the redirect. When I finish the article that I am working on, I will work on a bit of cleanup.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the important society at the time was the New England one, which became national, leaving behind a relatively unimportant Massachusetts society. (Unimportant because Mass. was already the most anti-slavery state; the battle was already won there.) Sorry if I'm telling you things you already know or am repeating myself. I do that. deisenbe (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

No, that's fine. I could be remembering wrong, but aren't some of the major movers and shakers in the overall / national anti-slavery movement from Massachusetts, vs. other New England states.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:28, 3 May 2023 (UTC)