Talk:Ben Thompson (lawman)

Ben Thompson (lawman) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 17, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Law Enforcement

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

United States: Old West / Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject American Old West (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Legend

User BMT outright removed some accurate and relevant information that I sourced from news articles. I would like this article to remain neutral and would like to point out that for a peculiar reason the user BMT feels that he has a vested interest in this article (because that user's name is in fact Ben Thompson too). Please, check the sources as I assure you they are correct.--TheEditor20 15:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MrEditor20, This citation's article does not appear on its website (http://www.freenewmexican.com) and is highly questionable. I have removed the content, you can provide a suitable, genuine, non-trivial source. If you wish to experiment with Wikipedia then you can use the Sandbox but the encyclopaedia is not a toy or a soapbox. --BMT 16:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are by no means trivial and I would also like to let you know that the Free New Mexican is not one of the sources I provided. If you have access to LexixNexis then you will be able to see my souces are accurate and non-trivial. The fact is there are very few articles on Ben Thompson and so it is almost impossible to find a trivial article. LexixNexis is not the only source for the information, and if you are unable to trace a source then that is your problem. I would not call the use of LexisNexix an obscure tool for referencing. I would also like to point out that my search in LexisNexis was only for 'major stories'--194.177.166.118 16:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For anybody reading this, can you please sign your comments affirming that the sources I provided for 'legend' section are accurate. User BMT is removing them, partly because of his inability to check sources. If for example I was unable to check a source because it meant buying a book that does not give me the right to remove the reference. Likewise, i would appreciate user BMT checking the sources first.--TheEditor20 16:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the article:

http://www.yourfilehost.com/media.php?cat=other&file=termsben_thompson_or.rtf

Now what more do you want?--TheEditor20 16:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hosting a file on a file hosting website is hardly anything approaching verifiable information. Please link or cite a reputable source or please stop vandalizing this page. Also, I'd like to defend BMT who has obviously kept his cool, and I would like to point out that TheEditor20 has a very low comprehension of WP:CIVIL. JHMM13

18:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now look here....I dont know who you are JHMM13 but I do believe you are likely to be a sockpuppet of BMT. Furthermore, your ineptitude in locating a source does not mean that it is wrong. If you look on LexisNexis Executive using the search terms "ben thompson" and "1884" then you will find the information. Its not hard. I have even provided a screenshot of the information. I find it upsurd that I should have to go to such lengths to prove an easily found source. I could quite easily question the authenticity of the information added to the article by user BMT. In fact I do question it. I am commited to NPOV. Here is the link to a screenshot: http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/631/sourcelk0.jpg

Stop being childish.--TheEditor20 18:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whether TheEditor20's source is correct or not I think the "Legend" section does not reflect NPOV and indeed is inaccurate. It may be that TheEditor20's source and his belligerency / vandalism has confused the issue. It is quite clear that Ben Thompson was a very famous gunmen, there are many sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] singing his praises, even referring to him as "The Famous Texan". Can we therefore agree that the section itself, even if this LN article does exist, it is inappropriate for the article. I'd also like to thank JHMM13 for his support :). --BMT 19:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is no question as to Ben Thompson notoriety, but I think this was certainly more well known in the era of Ben Thompson. For example, in the 1880's he would have certainly been famous in Texas. However I think we can agree that his is by no way as famous as Billy the Kid or Jesse James, and this is in part due to the appeal of appearance of these characters. This Ben Thompson article was only created in the last month, and I would like to point out by user BMT aka Ben Thompson. I am not trying to make out that Ben Thompson isnt notorious, for he surely was. I am maintaining NPOV by quoting a reliable source that he is not as infamous as Billy the Kid or Jesse James (articles that have been documented on wikipedia for a very long time now). --TheEditor20 20:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to point out that I do know user BMT personaly, and that I believe that he is trying to prevent me from adding material to an article that bears his own name (especially if the material presents the character in a negative way). I implore anyone who has an interest in maintaining NPOV to check my sources (I think i have proved that they are real), and to uphold that my addition to the article should remain.--TheEditor20 20:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the section to the talk page until this is resolved. --BMT 21:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One might wonder why a character with a background like Thompson's isnt so familiar to fans of popular Hollywood Westerns. According to the Santa Fe New Mexican (1997), "His voice, along with a penchant for cold-blooded murder and a reputedly ugly mug, made Thompson a less-than-desirable Western icon." In the article, Mark Kilmurry upon choosing Ben Thompson as the lead character for his theater production John Wayne Never Slept Here commented:

"Thompson wasn't charismatic, he wasn't good looking. He had thinning hair and a terrible mustache. And listen: Billy the Kid. Jesse James. Wyatt Earp. Those are great names. Ben Thompson? It just doesn't have that ring to it."

For these reasons many hollywood producers have been reluctant to iconise Ben Thompson, choosing the more more aesthetically pleasing Billy the Kid or Jesse James. Kilmurry stated that he chose Ben Thompson for his "current anonymity" and his "anti-hero qualities".

I've changed the offending section I hope we can agree that it is sourced reliably, neutral, encyclopaedic in tone etc. etc. Hopefully we can move on from this and with any luck, no one will notice that its probably a candidate for WP:LAME --BMT 17:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your information has its say in the article, but you are not warranted from removing other sourced information. There are clearly two views to this part of the article. This is for NPOV. You cannot remove other views because you dont personaly agree with them--TheEditor20 17:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Murder

I do not believe the information from http://ddfa.org/kingfisher.html is verifiable and reliable data. I therefore cast doubt on the factural accuracy of this section. The source has now moved to http://www.ccchaney.com/Damron/kingfisher.html

Much of the information here is poorly/not sourced itself, and looks like a child's essay. There are a few sources, but there are certainly no citations to reference how the sources were used.

http://members.aol.com/Gibson0817/Thompson.htm? How is that considered by any means reliable verifiable information? User BMT can't provide newspapers and major publications to support his information, whereas I can (for the legend section).

--TheEditor20 09:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I provided these sources mainly because they are secondary, online, verifiable sources. If you refer to Further Reading you will notice that there are many authorities sources that studied the lives of gunfighters as opposed to the Santa Fe New Mexican which is a tertiary source that is not verifiable and doubted by me and others in the community; even if the source were authentic then it would hardly be authoritative, they are hardly experts on the subject. --BMT 09:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to explaining why the character Ben Thompson isnt so familiar to fans of popular western fans you need an impartial source. You you need a source that is independent of the subject. A book on Ben Thompson's life is unlikely to provide thisw information and is also going to have a vested interest in making the character appear more famous than he actually is. Furhter, I do not believe that the souces are reliable. User BMT has not examined the books that the information supposedly came from. They have been written as souces on unprofessional websites that dont even use citations. I have provided a good modern souce of a newspaper. It is a primary souce. Several well known historians and movie/theater producers contributed to the article and therefore it carrys a lot more validity.--TheEditor20 10:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to quote from the Wikipedia [Wikipedia:Reliable_source|Reliable Sources] page:

A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication. It includes personal websites and books published by vanity presses.

These are predominently the kind of the sources that user BMT has been using to support the information he has and is trying to contribute to the article.--194.177.166.118 11:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I meant to press PREVIEW with my previous edit on the main article. I wanted to see what would happen...I did not want to publish it.

Undue weight for Billy Thompson

Too much detail is given to Billy Thompson's exploits in NV before Masterson goes to rescue him. He is only Ben Thompson's younger brother; the material should be summarized, if included at all. This is UNDUE WEIGHT, which WIKI MOS discourages.Parkwells (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too much detail on gunfights

Clearly there are fans among editors contributing to articles on the Old West, but these men were gunmen and every shot they took does not have to be listed. They were young men with guns, so they shot them. Sounds much too familiar.Parkwells (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ben Thompson (lawman). 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/20060910085900/http://ddfa.org:80/kingfisher.html to http://ddfa.org/kingfisher.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}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 18:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]