Talk:Death of Shedrick Thompson

The article needs to both re-named an re-written

As many sources point out, this may not even have been a lynching, but mutilation of a suicide’s corpse. The article needs to both re-named an re-written. Qwirkle (talk) 16:30, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Revisionism accepted as fact

This article in its current form is pursuasive writing, not neutral exposition. Qwirkle (talk) 23:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Removing two templates

I have removed the "Accuracy disputed" tag which you (@Qwirkle:) put on it again.

1. There is a whole book making the case that this was in fact a lynching. The book also discusses _why_ the coroner's report said it was a suicide.
2. There is an hour-long documentary on exactly the same thing, interviewing witnesses and with explicit statements from descendants of the contemporaries saying it was a lynching.
3. When you put the tag on it originally, the article was 3,454 bytes. Now it is 16,950 bytes. The previous version cited 5 sources. Now it cites 46. But you find it exactly the same. That's not rational on your part. You have not given any new explanation of what is _now_ disputed or why. Your statement on your 2nd lynching template reversion — "May, as many sources say, have been desecration of a suicide's corpse, not lynching" — is identical to your first statement, which suggests you did not even look at the article a 2nd time. Your statement that "many sources say" is not correct. Those that say it was not a lynching are far outnumbered by those that say it was, and at far greater length.

Although you have motivated me to spend many more hours on it, that I could have used on other things, it is now a much better article. So although it hurt, you have helped me. Thank you. But I wish you could show some appreciation for the investment of my time in writing it, instead of only finding fault with the article.

As for the Neutrality tag, I'm removing that too, since I do not understand, nor did you say, what you are objecting to or in what way it is not neutral writing. deisenbe (talk) 09:54, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

It is possible to find multiple sources that aver that Bessie the Deuce is descended from reptilian aliens. The mere existence of a source says nothing. The article is supposed to objectively present the mainstream scholarly thinking on the subject, which appears to be “jury’s still out on this one.” The idea that this may not have been a suicide is to be presented, not advocated as your article does.

Next, you are once again justifying your writing based on the time you put in on it, as you did with your strange assertions about pesos and dollars elsewhere. Such things don’t always improve an article. You thought your WP:OR on money was a good thing, too, remember. Was it? Qwirkle (talk) 15:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

If the National Lynching Museum accepts it as genuine (https://jim-hall-author.com/2018/05/08/fauquier-inscriptions-pictured-at-new-lynching-memorial/), the jury is not still out. No one since the 1930s has said it was a suicide. I'd appreciate it if you would stop the insults. deisenbe (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

No. The museum has a rather obvious axe to grind...and disagrees with you regardng the first point you make in the article. (Look at the spelling of his name.) Qwirkle (talk) 02:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive editing?

The following quotes from interviewees, which I put in today, were immediately removed by Qwirkle:

"In the movie, the following individuals state Thompson was lynched:

• "My father, James Mallory Nash, who grew up here in Warrenton, …said that when he was a young man, he was uptown, and under these courthouse steps, he saw a dead body that was supposed to been a black man that had been lynched." (Arthur "Bunny" Nash)
• "There was a lynching right over the mountain. Yeah, there was a lynching over the mountain. …All these gangs of them everywhere hunting him then. And they hunted that fellow and they caught him on the mountain." (Guy Jackson, 1895–1980, recorded in 1973)
• "Earl, and then there was John, and Carlisle, from what I understood all three of them lynched him." (Mary Herrell)
• "They did it all. You know, they pulled his nails out, teeth out, they castrated him, they set him on fire, of course the article says he was shot, obviously lynched.… Nobody ever made it sound like it lasted for great gobs of time [searching for him], they just, you know, caught him, and he was hung." (Jeff Urbanski)
• "He was lynched." (Julia Clay Mopkins, the victim's niece)

Among those interviewed was Melvin Poe (1920-2014), grandson of the sheriff at the time, and family historian Daniel Heath de Butts. No one in the movie expresses any doubt that it was a lynching; no one mentions suicide.

deisenbe (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

No one is disputing that that source is intended to put across the idea that this was a lynching. Whether the article needs this level of repetition of hearsay is a different point. Given your willingness to, frankly, invent lynchings (see Lynching of John Shillady), I think your ability to write on this subject without injecting your own point of view is compromised. Qwirkle (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I've asked you before to stop the insults. What I did or didn't do on another article has nothing to do with what is right re this article. deisenbe (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

If you are “insulted” by descriptions of your own behavior, an obvious fix presents itself. What you did (gentle reader, follow the link, there is no “Didn’t” about it) in another article suggests a strong tendency to find the facts you like, rather than the facts that are. Qwirkle (talk) 22:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Recent edit suggests renaming

@Jacona:’s recent rewrite of the lead, on the whole an improvement, shows the need for a neutral, and possibly more accurate title, such as Death of....

It is also, though, a bit of a whitwashing of the subject. Crimes is a weak substitute for Attempted Murder, Robbery, and Rape, which every account seem to accept as accurate. Qwirkle (talk) 18:17, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

1.) I wanted to avoid a list. It's the lede after all. 2.) While sources from the 30s all say crimes were committed, he was never tried for any of these. It's easy to assume the story told by the two alleged victims is true, but all we really have for that is their testimony, and with the alleged perpetrator dead, and black, and with the governor desperately wanting to deny it was a lynching, there was no incentive (actually, a strong disincentive) to investigate [whether a crime really was committed]. We will never know.Jacona (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Every source presented, some strongly condemnatory of the final outcome, seem to agree that Thompson was, in fact, guilty, and none whatsoever contest that both victims were beaten badly. Perhaps we should rename this Attack on... or Rape of...? That’s inline with other crime reporting. Qwirkle (talk) 18:35, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Note, @Jacona: correctly since altered the bracketted section above to 1.) I wanted to avoid a list. It's the lede after all. 2.) While sources from the 30s all say crimes were committed, he was never tried for any of these. It's easy to assume the story told by the two alleged victims is true, but all we really have for that is their testimony, and with the alleged perpetrator dead, and black, and with the governor desperately wanting to deny it was a lynching, there was no incentive (actually, a strong disincentive) to investigate whether Thompson actually committed a crime. We will never know.Jacona (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)Qwirkle (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Qwirkle:, you have summed up the mob mentality of the 1870s-19xx well. "We all agree he's guilty, so let's kill him and thereby justice will be served." That's the case here. He was accused, therefore he was guilty. He's dead, so justice was served. The sources of the 30s seemed to be split. The NAACP seemed to believe it was a lynching, but then caved to appease the governor, from whom they wanted other favors. Modern sources seem to agree it's a lynching. We know the 30s sources were highly prone to bias, and had strong incentive to misrepresent the case, so why would we give them greater credence?Jacona (talk) 20:31, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

No, several times over. To quote the author on whom this article is perhaps too narrowly based, ”Henry and Mamie Baxley were asleep in their upstairs bedroom when Shedrick Thompson attacked them.” This is a near universal judgement, and one that begins the book this article centers on.

Next, both this work and many others make it quite clear that all lynchings were not mindless mob action, and that this one in particular, iif it was a lynching, was not a mass spectacle. As I mentioned (elswhere?), the author explicitly stated that some compilations of lynchings exclude this. Qwirkle (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Again, no trial, no investigation of the alleged crimes, just acceptance of what the surviving, white people said. Dead men tell no tales. Jacona (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

The lynching inventory in the Racial Terror: Lynching in Virginia website (I'm affiliated with it) does include Shedrick Thompson as a confirmed case of lynching. It is perhaps worth mentioning it in the section "The Last Lynching in Northern Virginia", after citing the National Lynching Memorial. Ringo85 (talk) 00:51, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Also note, that my self-edit occurred before any response was made to it. If anyone wants to see the changes, they can look at the history. Thanks.Jacona (talk) 20:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

No, there was no implication that you hadn’t intended. I just wanted to make clear what I was responding to in the easiest way for others to follow. Qwirkle (talk) 02:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

May I suggest to change the title of the section 'Battery, robbery, and rape' to 'Accusation of battery, robbery and rape'? Thompson was never tried and found guilty of those crimes; the new title would be more accurate and neutral (otherwise we are just assuming his guilt). Ringo85 (talk) 00:41, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree fully. Jacona (talk) 09:20, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and added 'Accusation of' in the title of the section. Ringo85 (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Repairing Broken links

There are several broken links - I'm affiliated with the website that those links connect to. I would suggest to repair those broken links. I can suggest the correct hyperlink if deemed appropriate. Ringo85 (talk) 18:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Post here what should be changed, and what it should be changed to. deisenbe (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Footnote#1: http://sites.jmu.edu/valynchings/the-lynching-of-shedrick-thompson/ --> http://sites.lib.jmu.edu/valynchings/the-lynching-of-shedrick-thompson/

Footnote# 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20: http://sites.jmu.edu/valynchings/va1932091501/ --> http://sites.lib.jmu.edu/valynchings/va1932091501/

Thanks! Ringo85 (talk) 00:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)