| Revision as of 14:18, 25 January 2017 editTostegga (talk | contribs)1 edit →Other music references: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit |
Revision as of 00:27, 26 January 2017 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,305,321 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Billy the Kid/Archive 5) (botNext edit → |
| Line 45: |
Line 45: |
|
|archive = Talk:Billy the Kid/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Billy the Kid/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
==Billy the Kid's birth== |
|
|
<s>(Since I'm a relatively new editor with no experience or knowledge of the GA review process, I'm putting this comment in a new talk page section instead of the GA review page. If you think it belong there, feel free to move it.)</s> |
|
|
|
|
|
The September 17, 1859 birth in New York City to Patrick and Catherine Devine is only a theory and the article should make this clear and this information definitely should not be included in the infobox. It comes the 1980 article "The Search for Billy the Kid's Roots – Is Over!" by Jack DeMattos. It's mentioned by Utley and Nolan in their books but not accepted by them. I have not read the DeMattos article, can't find it online, and don't know where I might be able find a copy of it. So, I can only go by what other sources and what DeMattos said while editing this Misplaced Pages page; there might be more evidence to support his theory that I'm not aware of. If anybody does have access to a copy could they describe all of his evidence & arguments? |
|
|
|
|
|
The theory seems based on the 1859 year of birth given in '']'' (1882), the 1860 census of this family (link ) and then locating the baptism record of that McCarty family's Henry (who's mother, Catherine was close in age to Billy's mother as given in her 1874 obituary). Along with proof that a Patrick McCarty, husband of Catherine, who lived at 210 Greene Street died sometime between 1863-1864. I can't tell if DeMattos actually proved the two Patrick McCartys were the same person. |
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly, we can't be sure about 1859 as the birth year. Nolan writes that George Coe in 1932 and Frank Coe in 1928 stated that they believed Billy was about 17 years old during the fight at Blazer's Mill in April 1878 (with footnotes ). A wire service article from 1881, claiming to reprint parts of a July 18, 1881 article by the ] Daily Optic newspaper writes that Billy was 20 years old at the time of his death. If it does accurately quote the Daily Optic about Billy's age; presumably the newspaper reflected New Mexico locals knowledge which matched the Coes' later recollections. If Henry/Billy was born a year later than the date in the 1882 book, he couldn't show up in the 1860 census as Demattos thought. |
|
|
|
|
|
Secondly, we have no direct evidence linking this other McCarty family to Billy's family. In fact, Koop writes that in the Indianpolis city directories, Catherine lists herself as the widow of Michael and not Patrick. |
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't be against including the September 1859 birth to Patrick and Catherine as a seemingly widespread theory that has yet to be proven or disproven but it shouldn't be stated as fact and the nonacceptance by other Billy the Kid scholars (like Utley or Nolan) should be noted. I'd like to hear other editors thoughts are on the matter before I make any changes, though. ] (]) 23:30, 3 June 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
Just adding a note here, the Catherine McCarty widow of Michael in the 1867 and 1868 is mentioned in Wallis. I couldn't think of where I read it as well as in Koop's article in my earlier posts. ] (]) 18:52, 3 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I'd be interested in seeing the exact quote for context. As well, keep in mind that first names used were not always first names given at birth, sometimes to differentiate from their father's first names if the same, and not only in the case of juniors and seniors. Fathers names would often be the same first name of sons, middle names differed - and this could be for more than one son in a family. Very possible his legal first name was Michael or could have been Patrick and the other was used commonly. This happened with census taking and much confusion was the result later on for historians and genealogists alike. For Misplaced Pages purposes, just because Wallis says 'Michael' that doesn't rule out 'Patrick' if we have other sources for the latter. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 19:17, 3 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::I should've included the page number in my previous post. The two Indianapolis directory entries are on mentioned on pg. 14 of Wallis. ] (]) 20:35, 3 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::I've linked to the page on Wallis on the city directories . I actually agree with you that Michael or Patrick could have been a middle name and the Henry born on 17 Sept. 1859 to Patrick could be Billy. The point I was trying to make was that the 17 Sept. 1859 birth shouldn't be presented in the article as fact but as a theory since none of the major sources used in the article for Billy's life present it that way. Utley accepts it as possible but not yet proven, Nolan mentions it but seems to discount it, and Wallis doesn't mention it all because he seems to think Billy may have been born in Indiana instead of New York. (Although Wallis's contention that Billy's birth in New York was invented by newspaper reporters is contradicted by statements in William Antrim's pension file and Joseph Antrim's 1880 census record, which he doesn't address at all.) As far as I can tell, only Demattos's article presents it as a certainty. So, I think it should not be presented as a certainty but only a theory in the article text and should not be included in the infobox. ] (]) 20:32, 4 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Not trying to get stuck on terminology too much, but I think "theory" isn't an accurate way to refer to the differing views and we should refer to it differently in the article itself. "Belief" is more like it, I think. Thoughts? Also, I'm not sure DeMattos would qualify as an actual historian. Writer, is more like it - especially when held up against Wallis and the others whose references are used in this article. If, however, the birth date is held to by two or more historians who are actual researchers, that is the one we should include in the infobox. We could place a cite (or a few) with it and possibly an embedded or small script notation next to it, indicating that the birthdate has been disputed or is in question. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 21:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::{{u|Winkelvi}}, I guess I use "theory" to try to convey a more dispassionate tone in my own writing style but I think "belief" is also fine to use in the article. I still think it might be better/accurate to describe the evidence for the September 17, 1859 and why it's not certain in the article text than in the infobox. But then again writing it that way might be confusing to the reader, so you're embedded notation idea would be an acceptable compromise. Since {{u|BlueMoonset}} has also expressed similar concerns to mine about the birth date, I'd like to hear what their thoughts on this might be first. ] (]) 19:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::It's been over a week and no response, so I'm assuming they're okay with it. ] (]) 21:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Image== |
|
==Image== |
How is that any different than the croquet picture displayed in the biography? The Associated Press and the New York Times believe it is him, and the text has the appropriate caveats. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Text says Garrett had two deputies -- two sentences later "the pair sat in the room" --
so was only one with Garrett in the room? If so, it should say that before the pronoun "pair." 72.200.20.62 (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
