Talk:Salem witch trials/Archive 1

Archive 1: Threads with no additions after October 2006

Vandalism notices

Vandalism (22 Sep 05)

Someone just vandalized this page and then 1 minute later had an attack of conscience and reverted to previous version. I'm not sure if I should have faith in humanity or not. Vicarious 17:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

fixed vandalism, jan 20 2005—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.231.160 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 20 January 2006

Recent vandalism (16 Sep 06)

User:SantaLuciaStudent has recently been vandalising this page, with vandilism being reverted twice. I have given this user a warning, but I would appreciate if an admin would look into following it through. -Phi*n!x 20:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misquoting Mather

The passage from Increase Mather's Cases of Conscience concerning evil SPIRITS Personating Men, Witchcrafts, infallible Proofs of Guilt in such as are accused with that Crime is often misquoted, with him suggesting 100 witches go free: this is ten times the figure he suggested: here it is as it appeared on pp. 66-7: "When therefore such like things shall be Testified against the accused party not by Spectres which are Devils in the Shape of persons either living or dead, but by real men or women who may be credited, it is proof enough that such an one has that Conversation and Correspondence with the Devil as that he or she, whoever they be, ought to be exterminated from amongst men. This notwithstanding, I will add; It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that the Innocent Person should be Condemned. That is an old saying and true, Prestat reum innocentem absolvi, quam ex prohibitis Indiciis & illegitima probatione condemnari It is better that a Guilty Person should be ABSOLVED, than that he should without sufficient ground of Conviction be condemned. I had rather judge a Witch to be an honest woman, than judge an honest woman as a witch. The Word of God directs men not to proceed to the Execution of the most capital offenders, untill such time as upon searching diligently the matter is found to be a Truth, and the thing certain. -- Nunh-huh 08:18, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. But if this is a common misquote then that fact really should be in parenthesis following the quote. Otherwise somebody will come along later and "correct" it back to 100. Something like '(commonly misquoted as "a hundred guilty witches go free")' would do just fine. --mav 09:48, 23 February 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Done, added it in as a note..plus I realized that people confuse "guilty" with "suspected", so that's in there too..." -- Nunh-huh 19:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Beverly?

According to the article Beverly, Massachusetts, "The witchcraft delusion of 1692 began and ended in Beverly." Is this so? If not, I'll take that line out of the Beverly article, but I want to double-check before acting. AJD 23:55, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Bad link to John Hale

The link in this article to John Hale seems to be a person unrelated to the John Hale involved at Salem. The link is for a representative who served from 1843 – 1845, which puts him in the wrong time frame, to put it gently. If someone wants to write an article for the Salem John Hale, that would be nice. If not, I'll get rid of the link. Vonspringer 02:59, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Verbosity

the page as it stands is verbose, doesn't come to the point, and leaves out some very important information about Mary (Woodrow) Sibley who was the person who started the whole affair. WB2 00:56, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

VIRGINIA EDU

What's up with these people, don't they want a link to their site? 207.214.244.173 06:13, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Was this really religious persecution?

So would this article fit in Category:Religious persecution do you think? -- nyenyec ☎ 13:37, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, because this was basically social persecution. None of the accused were 'witches.' I'll try to find the citation for that, if I can't, I'll reply later.--Ollie Garkey 12:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tone

Yes. We had it cleaned up when someone deleted all that ...
WB2 07:15, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

"their workers arrested or gawking at the spectacles" > word 'or' should be 'for'—Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.122.250.250 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 29 September 2005

"pwned"

Maybe it would be a good idea edit this:

Jake Hohenthaner — pwned by Teddy Smith August 19, 2005

I really don't think that this is appropriate for this article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.35.167 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 22 October 2005

Something weird in Background section?

This sentence seems weird to me
"Some say that the indians were the real witch craft in salem village. That they were what drove the people crazy but who knows."
It looks out of place, but I'm not sure? Also, if it is some sort of vandalism, the same user made several other changes.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.211.213.60 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 29 January 2006

Thanks, 82.211.213.60, for pointing that out. I've fixed it. AnnH ^(talk) 11:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Background opening sentence

The background opening sentence, despite it being a quote from a book, is false. The first two afflicted were Abigail Williams and Betty Parris, aged 11 and 9. It was Dr Griggs, master also of Betty Hubbard, who diagnosed witchcraft, not the girls. The other girls that were afflicted were between 12 and 20 years old, and include: Betty Hubbard (17), Mercy Lewis (19), Ann Putnam Jr (12), Mary Walcott (17) and Mary Warren (20), who later was herself named a witch. I have so far to find any evidence for the partying in the woodland.
-- Rck 04:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Scott

In the template box at the bottom of the article that links to related articles, the "Margaret Scott" link goes to an article about a Tasmanian poet born in 1934. Surely a different Margaret Scott. I doubt many people would be confused by it, but it's kind of... sloppy. Maybe the template should be changed to make sure it doesn't link there.Cyllya 08:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bridget Bishop

Needs her own page...not a redirect to here...-Billy Bishop 01:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Martha Carrier. Unfortunately, I don't have the information to do it. Septegram 15:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Bridget Bishop-Billy Bishop 02:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Black -- 1955 ????

Excuse us, Mr Salem Witch Trial Box maker, Mary Black was NOT born 22 May 1955. Thank you...
Also, you might want to correct the William Hobbs link...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.214.244.171 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 22 June 2006

Sexism comment

"Girls had particular cruelties heaped upon them" - this is not necessarily justified, "Restrictions" would surely be a better term instead of "cruelties"? Jeremynicholas 09:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. That whole paragraph could use a rewrite; its tone is a bit judgmental for an encyclopedia entry. For example, I think it's misleading to say that "children suffered." Their role was certainly different from a modern child's, but I don't believe there are any records indicating that they suffered for it. Oconduibh 19:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]